Yann LeCun, chief AI scientist at Meta, publicly rebuked supporters of California’s contentious AI safety bill, SB 1047, on Wednesday. His criticism came just one day after Geoffrey Hinton, often referred to as the “godfather of AI,” endorsed the legislation. This stark disagreement between two pioneers in artificial intelligence highlights the deep divisions within the AI community over the future of regulation.
California’s legislature has passed SB 1047, which now awaits Governor Gavin Newsom’s signature. The bill has become a lightning rod for debate about AI regulation. It would establish liability for developers of large-scale AI models that cause catastrophic harm if they failed to take appropriate safety measures. The legislation applies only to models costing at least $100 million to train and operating in California, the world’s fifth-largest economy.
The battle of the AI titans: LeCun vs. Hinton on SB 1047
LeCun, known for his pioneering work in deep learning, argued that many of the bill’s supporters have a “distorted view” of AI’s near-term capabilities. “The distortion is due to their inexperience, naïveté on how difficult the next steps in AI will be, wild overestimates of their employer’s lead and their ability to make fast progress,” he wrote on Twitter, now known as X.
His comments were a direct response to Hinton’s endorsement of an open letter signed by over 100 current and former employees of leading AI companies, including OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Anthropic. The letter, submitted to Governor Newsom on September 9th, urged him to sign SB 1047 into law, citing potential “severe risks” posed by powerful AI models, such as expanded access to biological weapons and cyberattacks on critical infrastructure.
This public disagreement between two AI pioneers underscores the complexity of regulating a rapidly evolving technology. Hinton, who left Google last year to speak more freely about AI risks, represents a growing contingent of researchers who believe that AI systems could soon pose existential threats to humanity. LeCun, on the other hand, consistently argues that such fears are premature and potentially harmful to open research.
Inside SB 1047: The controversial bill reshaping AI regulation
The debate surrounding SB 1047 has scrambled traditional political alliances. Supporters include Elon Musk, despite his previous criticism of the bill’s author, State Senator Scott Wiener. Opponents include Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and San Francisco Mayor London Breed, along with several major tech companies and venture capitalists.
Anthropic, an AI company that initially opposed the bill, changed its stance after several amendments were made, stating that the bill’s “benefits likely outweigh its costs.” This shift highlights the evolving nature of the legislation and the ongoing negotiations between lawmakers and the tech industry.
Critics of SB 1047 argue that it could stifle innovation and disadvantage smaller companies and open-source projects. Andrew Ng, founder of DeepLearning.AI, wrote in TIME magazine that the bill “makes the fundamental mistake of regulating a general purpose technology rather than applications of that technology.”
Proponents, however, insist that the potential risks of unregulated AI development far outweigh these concerns. They argue that the bill’s focus on models with budgets exceeding $100 million ensures that it primarily affects large, well-resourced companies capable of implementing robust safety measures.
Silicon Valley divided: How SB 1047 is splitting the tech world
The involvement of current employees from companies opposing the bill adds another layer of complexity to the debate. It suggests internal disagreements within these organizations about the appropriate balance between innovation and safety.
As Governor Newsom considers whether to sign SB 1047, he faces a decision that could shape the future of AI development not just in California, but potentially across the United States. With the European Union already moving forward with its own AI Act, California’s decision could influence whether the U.S. takes a more proactive or hands-off approach to AI regulation at the federal level.
The clash between LeCun and Hinton serves as a microcosm of the larger debate surrounding AI safety and regulation. It highlights the challenge policymakers face in crafting legislation that addresses legitimate safety concerns without unduly hampering technological progress.
As the AI field continues to advance at a breakneck pace, the outcome of this legislative battle in California may set a crucial precedent for how societies grapple with the promises and perils of increasingly powerful artificial intelligence systems. The tech world, policymakers, and the public alike will be watching closely as Governor Newsom weighs his decision in the coming weeks.
Author: Michael Nuñez
Source: Venturebeat
Reviewed By: Editorial Team
