type
status
date
slug
summary
tags
category
icon
password
📢【新聞標題】
Congress Might Block State AI Laws for a Decade – Here's What It Means
國會可能阻止州級人工智慧法規長達十年——這意味著什麼
📰【摘要】
A federal proposal that would ban states and local governments from regulating AI for 10 years could soon be signed into law, as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and other lawmakers work to secure its inclusion into a GOP megabill ahead of a key July 4 deadline. Critics warn that this provision would block states from passing laws that protect consumers from AI harms and would effectively allow powerful AI firms to operate without much oversight or accountability.
一項聯邦提案，旨在禁止州和地方政府在10年內監管人工智慧，可能很快就會簽署成為法律，因為參議員泰德·克魯茲（德克薩斯州共和黨）和其他立法者正努力確保將其納入共和黨的一項綜合法案中，趕在7月4日的重要截止日期之前。批評人士警告說，這項條款將阻止各州通過保護消費者免受人工智慧危害的法律，並有效地允許強大的人工智慧公司在沒有太多監督或問責的情況下運營。
🗝️【關鍵詞彙表】
📝 moratorium (n.)
- 暫緩、延期
- 例句: The so-called “AI moratorium” to be stripped from the budget reconciliation bill.
- 翻譯: 所謂的“人工智慧暫緩令”將從預算協調法案中移除。
📝 preempt (v.)
- 先佔、取代
- 例句: Such a measure could preempt state AI laws that have already passed.
- 翻譯: 這樣的措施可能會取代已經通過的州級人工智慧法律。
📝 reconciliation (n.)
- 協調、調解
- 例句: Cruz’s reconciliation language on Thursday, claiming the provision “forces states receiving BEAD funding to choose between expanding broadband or protecting consumers from AI harms for ten years.”
- 翻譯: 克魯茲週四的協調語言，聲稱該條款“迫使接受BEAD資金的州在擴大寬頻或保護消費者免受人工智慧危害之間做出選擇，為期十年。”
📝 oversight (n.)
- 監督、監管
- 例句: Critics warn that this provision would block states from passing laws that protect consumers from AI harms and would effectively allow powerful AI firms to operate without much oversight or accountability.
- 翻譯: 批評人士警告說，這項條款將阻止各州通過保護消費者免受人工智慧危害的法律，並有效地允許強大的人工智慧公司在沒有太多監督或問責的情況下運營。
📝 accountability (n.)
- 問責制、責任
- 例句: Critics warn that this provision would block states from passing laws that protect consumers from AI harms and would effectively allow powerful AI firms to operate without much oversight or accountability.
- 翻譯: 批評人士警告說，這項條款將阻止各州通過保護消費者免受人工智慧危害的法律，並有效地允許強大的人工智慧公司在沒有太多監督或問責的情況下運營。
📝 compliance (n.)
- 遵守、依從
- 例句: Cruz revised the proposal in June to make compliance with the AI moratorium a condition for states to receive funds from the $42 billion Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program.
- 翻譯: 克魯茲在六月修改了提案，使遵守人工智慧暫緩令成為各州接受420億美元寬頻公平接入和部署（BEAD）計畫資金的條件。
📝 advocate (v.)
- 提倡、主張
- 例句: John Thune, who has advocated for a “light touch” approach to AI regulation.
- 翻譯: 約翰·圖恩，他一直提倡對人工智慧監管採取“輕觸式”的方法。
✍️【文法與句型】
📝 would block states from passing laws that...
- 說明: Used to express the potential effect of a proposal or action on the ability of states to legislate.
- 翻譯: 用於表達一項提案或行動對各州立法能力的潛在影響。
- 例句: Critics warn that this provision would block states from passing laws that protect consumers from AI harms.
- 翻譯: 批評人士警告說，這項條款將阻止各州通過保護消費者免受人工智慧危害的法律。
📝 have a direct fiscal impact
- 說明: Used to describe the requirement for provisions in a budget bill to have a specific financial effect.
- 翻譯: 用於描述預算法案中的條款必須具有特定財務影響的要求。
- 例句: Because provisions in a budget bill must have a direct fiscal impact, Cruz revised the proposal in June.
- 翻譯: 因為預算法案中的條款必須具有直接的財務影響，克魯茲在六月修改了提案。
📖【全文與翻譯】
A federal proposal that would ban states and local governments from regulating AI for 10 years could soon be signed into law, as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and other lawmakers work to secure its inclusion into a GOP megabill ahead of a key July 4 deadline.
一項聯邦提案，旨在禁止州和地方政府在10年內監管人工智慧，可能很快就會簽署成為法律，因為參議員泰德·克魯茲（德克薩斯州共和黨）和其他立法者正努力確保將其納入共和黨的一項綜合法案中，趕在7月4日的重要截止日期之前。
Those in favor – including OpenAI’s Sam Altman, Anduril’s Palmer Luckey, and a16z’s Marc Andreessen – argue that a “patchwork” of AI regulation among states would stifle American innovation at a time when the race to beat China is heating up.
包括OpenAI的Sam Altman、Anduril的Palmer Luckey和a16z的Marc Andreessen在內的支持者認為，各州之間“拼湊式”的人工智慧監管將在與中國競爭日益激烈的時刻扼殺美國的創新。
Critics include most Democrats, many Republicans, Anthropic’s CEO Dario Amodei, labor groups, AI safety nonprofits, and consumer rights advocates.
批評者包括大多數民主黨人、許多共和黨人、Anthropic的執行長Dario Amodei、勞工團體、人工智慧安全非營利組織和消費者權益倡導者。
They warn that this provision would block states from passing laws that protect consumers from AI harms and would effectively allow powerful AI firms to operate without much oversight or accountability.
他們警告說，這項條款將阻止各州通過保護消費者免受人工智慧危害的法律，並有效地允許強大的人工智慧公司在沒有太多監督或問責的情況下運營。
On Friday, a group of 17 Republican governors wrote to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who has advocated for a “light touch[https://www.axios.com/2025/06/25/thune-ai-moratorium-big-beautiful-bill?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top]” approach to AI regulation, and House Speaker Mike Johnson calling for the so-called “AI moratorium” to be stripped from the budget reconciliation bill, per Axios[https://www.axios.com/pro/tech-policy/2025/06/27/republican-governors-want-state-ai-pause-out-of-budget-bill].
上週五，一群17位共和黨籍州長致函參議院多數黨領袖約翰·圖恩（John Thune），他一直提倡對人工智慧監管採取“輕觸式[https://www.axios.com/2025/06/25/thune-ai-moratorium-big-beautiful-bill?utmsource=newsletter&utmmedium=email&utmcampaign=newsletteraxiosam&stream=top]”的方法，以及眾議院議長邁克·詹森（Mike Johnson），呼籲將所謂的“人工智慧暫緩令”從預算協調法案中移除，根據Axios[https://www.axios.com/pro/tech-policy/2025/06/27/republican-governors-want-state-ai-pause-out-of-budget-bill]報導。
The provision was squeezed into the bill, nicknamed the “Big Beautiful Bill,” in May.
該條款於五月被塞進了這項被暱稱為“美好法案”（Big Beautiful Bill）的法案中。
It is designed to prohibit states from “[enforcing] any law or regulation regulating [AI] models, [AI] systems, or automated decision systems” for a decade.
其目的是禁止各州在十年內“[執行]任何監管[人工智慧]模型、[人工智慧]系統或自動決策系統的法律或法規”。
Such a measure could preempt state AI laws that have already passed, such as California’s AB 2013[https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/04/many-companies-wont-say-if-theyll-comply-with-californias-ai-training-transparency-law/], which requires companies to reveal the data used to train AI systems, and Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, which protects musicians and creators from AI-generated impersonations.
這樣的措施可能會取代已經通過的州級人工智慧法律，例如加州的AB 2013[https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/04/many-companies-wont-say-if-theyll-comply-with-californias-ai-training-transparency-law/]，該法案要求公司披露用於訓練人工智慧系統的數據，以及田納西州的ELVIS法案，該法案保護音樂家和創作者免受人工智慧生成的模仿。
The moratorium’s reach extends far beyond these examples.
該暫緩令的範圍遠遠超出了這些例子。
Public Citizen has compiled a database[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uUt58pz813ZYnnWp-5su9A0z5SY2pxeMoMERmea1kk4/edit?gid=0#gid=0] of AI-related laws that could be affected by the moratorium.
Public Citizen已經編制了一個可能受到該暫緩令影響的人工智慧相關法律的資料庫[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uUt58pz813ZYnnWp-5su9A0z5SY2pxeMoMERmea1kk4/edit?gid=0#gid=0]。
The database reveals that many states have passed laws that overlap, which could actually make it easier for AI companies to navigate the “patchwork.”
該資料庫顯示，許多州已經通過了重疊的法律，這實際上可能使人工智慧公司更容易駕馭這種“拼湊式”的局面。
For example, Alabama, Arizona, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Montana and Texas have criminalized or created civil liability for distributing deceptive AI-generated media meant to influence elections.
例如，阿拉巴馬州、亞利桑那州、加利福尼亞州、德拉瓦州、夏威夷州、印第安納州、蒙大拿州和德克薩斯州已經將分發旨在影響選舉的欺騙性人工智慧生成媒體定為犯罪或產生民事責任。
The AI moratorium also threatens several noteworthy AI safety bills awaiting signature, including New York’s RAISE Act[https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/13/new-york-passes-a-bill-to-prevent-ai-fueled-disasters/], which would require large AI labs nationwide to publish thorough safety reports.
人工智慧暫緩令還威脅到幾項值得關注的等待簽署的人工智慧安全法案，包括紐約州的RAISE法案[https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/13/new-york-passes-a-bill-to-prevent-ai-fueled-disasters/]，該法案將要求全國各地的大型人工智慧實驗室發布全面的安全報告。
Getting the moratorium into a budget bill has required some creative maneuvering.
將暫緩令納入預算法案需要一些創造性的策略。
Because provisions in a budget bill must have a direct fiscal impact, Cruz revised the proposal in June to make compliance with the AI moratorium a condition for states to receive funds from the $42 billion Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program.
因為預算法案中的條款必須具有直接的財務影響，克魯茲在六月修改了提案，使遵守人工智慧暫緩令成為各州接受420億美元寬頻公平接入和部署（BEAD）計畫資金的條件。
Cruz then released another revision[https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2025/6/chairman-cruz-releases-updated-budget-reconciliation-text] on Wednesday, which he says ties the requirement only to the new $500 million in BEAD funding included in the bill – a separate, additional pot of money.
克魯茲隨後在週三發布了另一項修訂[https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2025/6/chairman-cruz-releases-updated-budget-reconciliation-text]，他表示，這項要求僅與法案中包含的新增5億美元BEAD資金掛鉤——這是一筆單獨的額外資金。
However, close examination of the revised text finds the language also threatens to pull already-obligated broadband funding from states that don’t comply.
然而，仔細審查修訂後的文本發現，該語言還威脅要從不遵守規定的州撤回已承諾的寬頻資金。
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) criticized[https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2025/6/new-cruz-budget-reconciliation-bill-same-as-the-old-cruz-budget-reconciliation-bill-leverages-bead-funding-to-ban-state-ai-laws-for-10-years/ac1b28a5-c3a9-49b4-9f37-2b1e2b0ed2ca] Cruz’s reconciliation language on Thursday, claiming the provision “forces states receiving BEAD funding to choose between expanding broadband or protecting consumers from AI harms for ten years.”
參議員瑪麗亞·坎特韋爾（華盛頓州民主黨）週四批評了[https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2025/6/new-cruz-budget-reconciliation-bill-same-as-the-old-cruz-budget-reconciliation-bill-leverages-bead-funding-to-ban-state-ai-laws-for-10-years/ac1b28a5-c3a9-49b4-9f37-2b1e2b0ed2ca]克魯茲的協調語言，聲稱該條款“迫使接受BEAD資金的州在擴大寬頻或保護消費者免受人工智慧危害之間做出選擇，為期十年。”
Currently, the provision is at a standstill.
目前，該條款處於停滯狀態。
Cruz’s initial revision passed the procedural review earlier this week, which meant that the AI moratorium would be included in the final bill.
克魯茲最初的修訂在本週早些時候通過了程序審查，這意味著人工智慧暫緩令將被納入最終法案。
However, reporting today from Punchbowl News[https://x.com/benbrodydc/status/1938301145790685286?s=46] and Bloomberg[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-26/future-of-state-ai-laws-hinges-on-cruz-parliamentarian-talks?embedded-checkout=true] suggest that talks have reopened, and conversations on the AI moratorium’s language are ongoing.
然而，今天來自Punchbowl News[https://x.com/benbrodydc/status/1938301145790685286?s=46]和彭博社[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-26/future-of-state-ai-laws-hinges-on-cruz-parliamentarian-talks?embedded-checkout=true]的報導表明，談判已經重新開始，關於人工智慧暫緩令語言的討論正在進行中。
Sources familiar with the matter tell TechCrunch they expect the Senate to begin heavy debate this week on amendments to the budget, including one that would strike the AI moratorium.
熟悉此事的消息人士告訴TechCrunch，他們預計參議院本週將開始就預算修正案進行激烈的辯論，其中包括一項將取消人工智慧暫緩令的修正案。
That will be followed by a vote-a-rama – a series of rapid votes on the full slate of amendments.
隨後將進行投票拉鋸戰（vote-a-rama）——一系列針對所有修正案的快速投票。
Politico reported[https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/06/27/supreme-court-rulings-decisions-today-news-analysis/senate-slated-to-take-first-vote-on-megabill-saturday-00429782] Friday that the Senate is slated to take an initial vote on the megabill on Saturday.
Politico週五報導[https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/06/27/supreme-court-rulings-decisions-today-news-analysis/senate-slated-to-take-first-vote-on-megabill-saturday-00429782]，參議院預計將於週六對該綜合法案進行初步投票。
Chris Lehane, chief global affairs officer at OpenAI, said in a LinkedIn post[https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7342879984203591680/] that the “current patchwork approach to regulating AI isn’t working and will continue to worsen if we stay on this path.”
OpenAI的全球事務長Chris Lehane在LinkedIn貼文中表示[https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7342879984203591680/]，“目前拼湊式的人工智慧監管方法行不通，如果我們繼續走這條路，情況將會繼續惡化。”
He said this would have “serious implications” for the U.S. as it races to establish AI dominance over China.
他說，這將對美國產生“嚴重的影響”，因為美國正在與中國競相建立人工智慧的霸權。
“While not someone I’d typically quote, Vladimir Putin has said that whoever prevails will determine the direction of the world going forward,” Lehane wrote.
Lehane寫道：“雖然我通常不會引用他，但弗拉基米爾·普丁曾說過，無論誰獲勝，都將決定世界未來的方向。”
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman shared similar sentiments this week during a live recording[https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/25/sam-altman-comes-out-swinging-at-the-new-york-times/] of the tech podcast Hard Fork.
OpenAI執行長Sam Altman本週在科技Podcast Hard Fork的現場錄音中[https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/25/sam-altman-comes-out-swinging-at-the-new-york-times/]分享了類似的觀點。
He said while he believes some adaptive regulation that addresses the biggest existential risks of AI would be good, “a patchwork across the states would probably be a real mess and very difficult to offer services under.”
他說，雖然他認為一些針對人工智慧最大生存風險的適應性監管會很好，“但各州之間的拼湊可能會造成真正的混亂，而且很難在這種情況下提供服務。”
Altman also questioned whether policymakers were equipped to handle regulating AI when the technology moves so quickly.
Altman還質疑，當技術發展如此迅速時，決策者是否有能力處理人工智慧的監管。
“I worry that if…we kick off a three-year process to write something that’s very detailed and covers a lot of cases, the technology will just move very quickly,” he said.
他說：“我擔心，如果……我們啟動一個為期三年的過程來編寫一些非常詳細且涵蓋許多案例的東西，那麼這項技術將會發展得非常快。”
But a closer look at existing state laws tells a different story.
但是，仔細觀察現有的州法律會發現不同的情況。
Most state AI laws that exist today aren’t far-reaching; they focus on protecting consumers and individuals from specific harms, like deepfakes, fraud, discrimination, and privacy violations.
現今存在的大多數州級人工智慧法律並非影響深遠；它們側重於保護消費者和個人免受特定危害，如深度偽造、欺詐、歧視和侵犯隱私。
They target the use of AI in contexts like hiring, housing, credit, healthcare, and elections, and include disclosure requirements and algorithmic bias safeguards.
它們針對在招聘、住房、信貸、醫療保健和選舉等背景下使用人工智慧，並包括披露要求和演算法偏見保護措施。
TechCrunch has asked Lehane and other members of OpenAI’s team if they could name any current state laws that have hindered the tech giant’s ability to progress its technology and release new models.
TechCrunch已經詢問Lehane和OpenAI團隊的其他成員，他們是否能說出任何阻礙這家科技巨頭發展其技術和發布新模型能力的現行州法律。
We also asked why navigating different state laws would be considered too complex, given OpenAI’s progress on technologies that may automate a wide range of white-collar jobs in the coming years.
我們還問道，考慮到OpenAI在未來幾年可能自動化大量白領工作的技術方面取得的進展，為什麼駕馭不同的州法律會被認為太過複雜。
TechCrunch asked similar questions of Meta, Google, Amazon, and Apple, but has not received any answers.
TechCrunch向Meta、Google、Amazon和Apple提出了類似的問題，但尚未收到任何答覆。
“The patchwork argument is something that we have heard since the beginning of consumer advocacy time,” Emily Peterson-Cassin, corporate power director at internet activist group Demand Progress, told TechCrunch.
網際網路行動主義團體Demand Progress的企業力量主管艾米麗·彼得森-卡辛（Emily Peterson-Cassin）告訴TechCrunch：“自消費者倡議運動開始以來，我們就聽說過拼湊式的論點。”
“But the fact is that companies comply with different state regulations all the time. The most powerful companies in the world? Yes. Yes, you can.”
“但事實是，公司一直都在遵守不同的州法規。世界上最強大的公司？是的。是的，你們可以。”
Opponents and cynics alike say the AI moratorium isn’t about innovation – it’s about sidestepping oversight.
反對者和犬儒主義者都表示，人工智慧暫緩令與創新無關——而是為了迴避監督。
While many states have passed regulation around AI, Congress, which moves notoriously slowly, has passed zero laws regulating AI.
雖然許多州已經通過了關於人工智慧的法規，但以行動遲緩而聞名的國會尚未通過任何監管人工智慧的法律。
“If the federal government wants to pass strong AI safety legislation, and then preempt the states’ ability to do that, I’d be the first to be very excited about that,” said Nathan Calvin, VP of state affairs at the nonprofit Encode – which has sponsored several state AI safety bills – in an interview.
非營利組織Encode的州事務副總裁內森·卡爾文（Nathan Calvin）在一次採訪中說：“如果聯邦政府想要通過強有力的人工智慧安全立法，然後取代各州這樣做的能力，我會是第一個感到非常興奮的人。”該組織贊助了幾項州級人工智慧安全法案。
“Instead, [the AI moratorium] takes away all leverage, and any ability, to force AI companies to come to the negotiating table.”
“相反，[人工智慧暫緩令]剝奪了所有的籌碼和任何迫使人工智慧公司走上談判桌的能力。”
One of the loudest critics of the proposal is Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei.
該提案最激烈的批評者之一是Anthropic的執行長Dario Amodei。
In an opinion piece[https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/05/opinion/anthropic-ceo-regulate-transparency.html] for The New York Times, Amodei said “a 10-year moratorium is far too blunt an instrument.”
Amodei在《紐約時報》的一篇評論文章[https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/05/opinion/anthropic-ceo-regulate-transparency.html]中說，“10年的暫緩令是一種過於粗鈍的工具。”
“AI is advancing too head-spinningly fast,” he wrote.
他寫道：“人工智慧的發展速度太快了，令人眼花繚亂。”
“I believe that these systems could change the world, fundamentally, within two years; in 10 years, all bets are off.
“我相信這些系統可能會在兩年內從根本上改變世界；在10年內，一切都無法預測。
Without a clear plan for a federal response, a moratorium would give us the worst of both worlds — no ability for states to act, and no national policy as a backstop.”
如果沒有明確的聯邦應對計畫，暫緩令將使我們陷入兩難的境地——各州無法採取行動，也沒有國家政策作為後盾。”
He argued that instead of prescribing how companies should release their products, the government should work with AI companies to create a transparency standard for how companies share information about their practices and model capabilities.
他認為，政府不應規定公司應如何發布其產品，而應與人工智慧公司合作，為公司如何分享其做法和模型能力的信息制定透明度標準。
The opposition isn’t limited to Democrats.
反對派不僅限於民主黨人。
There’s been notable opposition to the AI moratorium from Republicans who argue the provision stomps on the GOP’s traditional support for states’ rights, even though it was crafted by prominent Republicans like Cruz and Rep. Jay Obernolte.
共和黨人對人工智慧暫緩令提出了顯著的反對意見，他們認為該條款踐踏了共和黨傳統上對州權利的支持，儘管它是由像克魯茲和眾議員傑伊·奧伯諾爾特（Jay Obernolte）這樣的著名共和黨人制定的。
These Republican critics include Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) who is concerned about states’ rights and is working with Democrats to strip it from the bill.
這些共和黨批評者包括參議員喬什·霍利（Josh Hawley，密蘇里州共和黨），他關心州權利，並與民主黨人合作將其從法案中移除。
Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) also criticized the provision, arguing that states need to protect their citizens and creative industries from AI harms.
參議員瑪莎·布萊克本（Marsha Blackburn，田納西州共和黨）也批評了該條款，認為各州需要保護其公民和創意產業免受人工智慧的危害。
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) even went so far as to say she would oppose the entire budget if the moratorium remains.
眾議員馬喬麗·泰勒·格林（Marjorie Taylor Greene，喬治亞州共和黨）甚至表示，如果暫緩令仍然存在，她將反對整個預算。
Republicans like Cruz and Senate Majority Leader John Thune say they want a “light touch[https://www.axios.com/2025/06/25/thune-ai-moratorium-big-beautiful-bill?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top]” approach to AI governance.
像克魯茲和參議院多數黨領袖約翰·圖恩這樣的共和黨人表示，他們希望對人工智慧治理採取“輕觸式[https://www.axios.com/2025/06/25/thune-ai-moratorium-big-beautiful-bill?utmsource=newsletter&utmmedium=email&utmcampaign=newsletteraxiosam&stream=top]”的方法。
Cruz also said in a statement[https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/78D6B49B-5C5A-44BB-9B03-B62391CD6C3A] that “every American deserves a voice in shaping” the future.
克魯茲在一份聲明中[https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/78D6B49B-5C5A-44BB-9B03-B62391CD6C3A]還表示，“每個美國人都應該在塑造未來方面擁有一份話語權。”
However, a recent Pew Research[https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2025/04/03/how-the-us-public-and-ai-experts-view-artificial-intelligence/#:~:text=Far%20more%20of%20the%20experts,regarding%20AI's%20impact%20on%20work.] survey found that most Americans seem to want more regulation around AI.
然而，皮尤研究中心（Pew Research）最近的一項調查[https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2025/04/03/how-the-us-public-and-ai-experts-view-artificial-intelligence/#:~:text=Far%20more%20of%20the%20experts,regarding%20AI's%20impact%20on%20work.]發現，大多數美國人似乎希望對人工智慧進行更多的監管。
The survey found that about 60% of U.S. adults and 56% of AI experts say they’re more concerned that the U.S. government won’t go far enough in regulating AI than they are that the government will go too far.
該調查發現，約有60%的美國成年人和56%的人工智慧專家表示，他們更擔心美國政府在監管人工智慧方面做得不夠，而不是政府會做得太過分。
Americans also largely aren’t confident that the government will regulate AI effectively, and they are skeptical of industry efforts around responsible AI.
美國人也普遍不相信政府能夠有效地監管人工智慧，並且他們對業界在負責任的人工智慧方面的努力表示懷疑。
This article has been updated to reflect newer reporting on the Senate’s timeline to vote on the bill and fresh Republican opposition to the AI moratorium.
本文已更新，以反映有關參議院對該法案進行投票的時間表以及共和黨對人工智慧暫緩令的最新反對意見的最新報導。
🔗【資料來源】
文章連結：https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/27/congress-might-block-state-ai-laws-for-a-decade-heres-what-it-means/