Search: “Contrast Security”

China Calls Amodei’s AI Proposal a New Cold War Playbook

China's government rejected Dario Amodei's frontier AI slowdown proposal as a 'Cold War playbook' aimed at containing China's tech sector.

China's Foreign Ministry and state-backed Global Times attacked Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei's 'We Must Pace the Frontier' essay, calling it fearmongering and US containment strategy. Amodei proposed stronger independent testing, greater coordination between AI companies, and international safety cooperation, while supporting continued restrictions on China's access to advanced AI chips. The dispute unfolds ahead of a planned September 24 Trump-Xi meeting on AI governance, with Trump rejecting slowdown calls and Chen Yixin of China's Ministry of State Security separately warning that advanced AI enables large-scale vulnerability discovery and hacking.

Security Affairs·Sep 14, 18:11 UTC · 2d agoAI policy

The latest AI doomsayer is China’s intelligence boss

China's State Security Minister Chen Yixin frames AI as a strategic battleground, urging technological sovereignty and new AI laws as CAC publishes safety framework 3.0.

Chen Yixin, China's minister for State Security, published an article in China Cyberspace Magazine calling AI the main battleground for global technological competition and warning it could be weaponized to exploit vulnerabilities, attack infrastructure, and steal secrets. He urged technological sovereignty, special AI laws, and Xi Jinping-aligned modernization of national security capabilities, citing risks from foreign AI products and user data leakage. The Cyberspace Administration of China followed with version 3.0 of its AI Safety Governance Framework, endorsing regulatory sandboxes and risk-controllable mechanisms. The stance implies continued exclusion of Nvidia and AMD GPUs from the Chinese market.

The Register · Security·Sep 15, 04:56 UTC · 2d agoAI policy

Trump may be forced to reveal secret rules feds use for AI safety testing

Protect Democracy sued four federal agencies to force disclosure of the administration's secret framework for frontier AI safety reviews.

Nonprofit Protect Democracy sued four federal agencies, including the Office of the National Cyber Director, OSTP, Treasury and Commerce, seeking disclosure of the secret voluntary framework used for pre-release safety reviews of frontier AI models. The complaint demands the framework text, participant identities and selection criteria by September 30, alleging OpenAI negotiated a private agreement limiting distribution of its cutting-edge models to government-vetted partners. The suit follows the launch of the GOLD EAGLE clearinghouse and the completion of the review framework on August 3, with California Senator Josh Becker supporting the request while the state considers the SB 813 bill for transparent AI safety standards.

Ars Technica · AI·Sep 2, 17:58 UTC · 14d agoAI policy

One in three security teams trust AI to act autonomously

Help Net Security·Sep 9, 10:02 UTC · Sep 9, 2025AI policy

The FTC wants to regulate AI for ideological bias

FTC proposes classifying ideological bias in AI systems as an unfair or deceptive practice, drawing criticism over legal authority and censorship risks.

FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson's proposed policy statement would treat ideological bias in AI systems as an unfair or deceptive practice under Section 5 of the FTC Act, potentially allowing regulation of the training and inputs powering AI algorithms. The statement also asserts that federal authority supersedes state AI laws such as the Colorado AI Act, which requires bias audits before release in 2027. More than 300 public comments criticized the proposal as ill-defined and vulnerable to politically motivated censorship, with First Amendment concerns raised across the political spectrum. Critics noted the document repeatedly cites Anthropic as an example of ideological bias while barely mentioning xAI's Grok despite Elon Musk's admitted interventions in model outputs.

CyberScoop·Aug 11, 21:37 UTC · Aug 11, 2026AI policy

Separating AI's Technological Problems from Its Capitalism Problems

Schneier and Sanders argue AI's harms stem from capitalist incentives and governance gaps, not just technical limits, urging structural reform.

Writing with Nathan E. Sanders in Tech Policy Press, Bruce Schneier argues that AI's technological problems (hallucination, sycophancy, overconfidence) must be separated from socio-political problems created by capitalist market incentives. The essay contrasts US frontier-scale, energy-intensive development with China's incentive-driven leaner open models on commodity hardware, and cites Switzerland's Apertus model - trained on licensed data using public computing and renewable hydropower - as a public-interest alternative. It contends that proposals like research pauses, data-center moratoria, and federal screening conflate technology problems with governance problems, and that society faces independent choices on both axes.

Schneier on Security·Aug 15, 00:00 UTC · Aug 15, 2026AI policy

Who gets to define the rules for AI?

Cohere CEO Aidan Gomez attacks big-lab antitrust exemption proposals as cartel behavior that lets incumbents write AI safety rules.

Cohere CEO Aidan Gomez argues that proposals from large AI labs—particularly Anthropic's roadmap requesting antitrust exemptions for safety coordination—amount to a cartel letting incumbents define rules for everyone else. He draws parallels to the 1975 SEC NRSRO credit-rating designations and the EU's 1985 Motor Vehicle Block Exemption, where safety justifications produced incumbent-protecting market structures. Gomez supports independent review of highly capable AI systems but disputes who writes the standards, who conducts review, and who participates. He also warns AI cyber offense is getting cheaper faster than defenses are improving.

Hacker News · AI·Sep 14, 04:49 UTC · 3d agoAI policyHN 41↑ · 29 comments