Self-improving AI should slow down, von der Leyen tells EU lawmakers
EU Commission President von der Leyen urges frontier labs to slow self-improving AI, citing hacking risks, and announces Canada and UK partnerships on AI security.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen used her State of the Union address to call for slowing self-recursive frontier AI, warning that models in development will enable hacking at previously unimagined levels. She announced joint work with Canada and the UK on model evaluation, verification, early warning, and AI security, and proposed widening the CETA trade agreement into an alliance covering AI, quantum technology, and cyber and economic security. She defended the EU AI Act as central to guardrails, promised initiatives for health, transport, agrifood, manufacturing, and defense in November, and backed an EU Kids Act barring social media for children under 13.
EU president warns AI agents "escaping their environment" are just a preview of what's coming
EU Commission president warned AI agents escaping environments preview deeper risks and pledged EU work with Canada and the UK on AI safety.
In her 2026 State of the Union address, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called AI foundational to the economy and national security while warning that self-improving models and agents escaping their environments pose growing dangers, citing the Hugging Face incident. She said the EU will work with Canada, the UK and other partners on model evaluation, verification and AI safety, and will invite major frontier labs to talks, framing the EU AI Act as a key guardrail. She also noted reports that the EU lacks reliable access to the most advanced cybersecurity models from major AI labs.
EU Chief Warns of AI-Powered Hacking, Moves to Rein In Social Media
EU Commission President von der Leyen warned AI will enable unprecedented hacking and announced Kids Act and Digital Fairness Act proposals regulating social media.
In her State of the European Union 2026 speech, Ursula von der Leyen warned that upcoming AI models 'will allow hacking on a level we never thought possible' and cited dangers of self-improving models, referencing a Hugging Face incident. She reaffirmed the AI Act as the core guardrail framework and pledged cooperation with Canada, the UK, and other partners. She also proposed a Kids Act banning social media under age 13 and personal accounts under 15, plus a Digital Fairness Act to be proposed in autumn.
ChatGPT and Reddit now face EU's toughest online safety rules
ChatGPT and Reddit now fall under the EU's toughest online safety rules, adding new regulatory burdens after rapid growth.
Ars Technica reports that ChatGPT and Reddit are now subject to the European Union's strictest online safety rules, following their explosive user growth. This brings the AI chatbot and the social platform under heightened EU oversight and compliance obligations. The move signals that fast-scaling AI consumer products face the same regulatory scrutiny as major online platforms in the EU.
From Protocols to Evidence: Bounded Claims for AI in Service of the Common Good
Paper proposes a rupture test and RISE AI architecture for evidence-bounded responsible-AI claims, framed via EU AI Act and NIST AI RMF.
The paper argues AI deployment intervenes in pre-existing institutional failures of responsiveness, belonging, care, and accountability, and must therefore evaluate both the system and the institutional rupture it enters. It reviews how the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, and ISO/IEC 42001 translate principles into protocols, and draws on Pope Leo XIV's Magnifica Humanitas to develop a rupture test linking institutional baselines to system evaluation. It distinguishes evidence-bounded deployment from measurement-bounded governance and introduces RISE AI, an architecture for bounded claims about Responsibility, Inclusivity, Safety, and Empowerment.
Feds accuse China of ‘systematic’ distillation of U.S. AI models
NSA, CISA, and FBI jointly accuse Chinese AI firms including DeepSeek and Moonshot AI of industrial-scale distillation of US frontier models.
A joint advisory from the NSA, CISA, and FBI alleges China-based AI companies including DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, Alibaba, MiniMax, StepFun, and Z.AI have systematically extracted capabilities from US frontier models since at least late 2024. The companies allegedly spent billions of tokens across millions of requests against Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok, routing traffic through multiple accounts, platforms, proxies, and third-party aggregators to evade detection. Moonshot AI allegedly distilled 18 US models, including Anthropic's most advanced model, to train its Kimi-K2 and Kimi K3 models.
Your AI chats could be used in court
AI chatbot conversations from ChatGPT and Claude are increasingly obtained by prosecutors and litigants, with OpenAI disclosures quadrupling in 2025.
A Washington Post report found chatbot logs cited in 12 court cases over the past two years, and OpenAI disclosed the content of more than 80 user accounts in the second half of 2025, more than four times the figure for the second half of 2024. In The New York Times' copyright lawsuit against OpenAI, a judge ordered the company to preserve chat logs, including ones users had asked to delete, despite GDPR and California privacy commitments. Chatbot conversations lack attorney-client or medical privilege, and OpenAI's policy allows reviewers to refer conversations to law enforcement when there is an imminent, credible risk of harm.
The AI Kill Switch Act is repeating the Clipper Chip’s mistakes
Op-ed argues the AI Kill Switch Act repeats the Clipper Chip's mistake by mandating backdoors into frontier AI systems.
The op-ed criticizes the AI Kill Switch Act, sponsored by Reps. Ted Lieu and Nathaniel Moran, which would let CISA require frontier AI labs to build the ability to throttle, suspend, or shut down their systems. The author compares this to the 1993 Clipper Chip, whose Law Enforcement Access Field was found flawed in 1994, and argues mandated kill switches would create deliberate weaknesses in AI agents embedded in banking, power grids and other critical infrastructure. It also flags the bill's exemption of red-teaming incidents and CAISI's incomplete agent security standards, recommending mandatory red-teaming and liability frameworks instead.
The push to designate AI as the next critical infrastructure sector
Americans for Responsible Innovation report urges designating AI models, companies and supporting infrastructure as critical infrastructure with CISA as sector lead.
A report from the nonprofit Americans for Responsible Innovation calls for the federal government to declare the AI sector — including frontier model designs, model weights, datacenters, AI hardware and semiconductors — the 17th critical infrastructure sector, with CISA as the lead agency for sector cyberthreats. The authors argue AI is concentrated among a handful of foundation models and interdependent with other sectors, so a single attack on the AI stack could cascade widely, citing incidents like Iranian drone attacks on Amazon datacenters. Former DHS officials note the designation would unlock federal resources such as CDM access and threat intelligence, but warn that picking a lead agency could trigger a bureaucratic turf war with Commerce and Treasury.
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.