How Trump Was Persuaded to Regulate A.I.

Hey, it's Michael. Before we start the. show, we want to let you know that our. colleague, Pulitzer Prize winning. culture critic and host of the Times. podcast Cannonball, Wesley Morris, is. going to be hosting a live event next. week at the Tribeca Festival. Wesley will be talking to the actress. and activist Cynthia Nixon. They'll be having a conversation about. great works of art about New York, which. makes sense given Nixon's starring role. in arguably one of them, Sex and the.

City. It promises to be a very fun and very. smart evening. The show is Friday, June 12th at 6:00. p.m. and you can get your tickets at. tribecafilm.com/audio. That's tribecafilm.com/audio. Okay, here's today's show. From The New York Times, I'm Michael. Barbaro. This is The Daily. [music].

>> [music]. >> Today, the story of how President [music] Trump. begrudgingly accepted that the most. transformational technology of our time, artificial intelligence, requires. government oversight. >> [music]. >> My colleague, Trip Mickle, takes us. inside [music] the dramatic White House. battle that has played out over the past. few weeks. >> [music]. >> and previews the coming fight over just.

how far federal [music] regulation of AI. should go. It's. >> [music]. >> Thursday, June 4th. Trip, welcome back to The Daily. >> Thanks so much for having me. >> I want you to explain exactly what. President Trump did a few days ago on. Tuesday. >> On Tuesday morning, as I was in the. middle of my commute, I was bombarded. with text messages saying that President.

Trump had. to many people's surprise, signed an. executive order to regulate artificial. intelligence. And it gives the. government for the first time really, under the Trump administration, oversight over AI models. This is a a. big change for an administration that. has had a an entirely hands-off approach. to regulating the tech industry and the. companies that are pushing artificial. intelligence forward. >> Mhm.

>> What the government has done is said. that AI companies will share their. models voluntarily with the government. about 30 days before they're released. publicly, so that the government can. review the models and figure out if. there any software vulnerabilities that. they could attack. And then that would. allow the government to patch those. vulnerabilities and prevent a cyber. attack by a foreign adversary or just a. bad actor. >> This seems like a relatively big ask,

which is let us, the government, take a. look at your. software before the world, before all. the businesses that want it, get a. chance. to buy it. What's the story. behind why this administration that has. been so hands-off decided at long last. that it should be in the business of. regulating artificial intelligence?

>> Well, it it's been on a journey. And. that journey began last year when. President Trump came into office. And. one of the first things he did was sign. an executive order that repealed and and. scrapped all of the rules from the Biden. era that were designed to bring some. safety processes to bear on artificial. intelligence. And Trump would explain why he did this. by saying. >> To make America great again, we're going. to make this industry absolutely the top.

because right now it's it's a beautiful. baby that's born. We have to. grow that baby and let that baby thrive. >> The AI industry is a beautiful baby and. you don't want rules to get in the way. of a beautiful baby when it's taking its. first steps. >> [music]. >> You just want it to take its first steps. essentially and let it start to run. >> And we can't stop it. We can't stop it. with. politics. We can't stop [music] it with. foolish rules and even stupid rules. At the same time. >> And that was.

the administration's philosophy and that. philosophy was really. cultivated and encouraged by David. Sacks, the White House AI czar. David is. a venture capitalist. He's [music]. pretty much a libertarian and he. believes that any rules would get in the. way of technologies advancement and. development. And he wins the president's. ear with two arguments. >> If the US continues to lead in AI, we. will remain the most powerful country, but if we don't,

we could fall behind our global. competitors like China. >> On one hand, like the geopolitical. competition between superpowers, between. the United States and China for who's. going to control this technology that. clearly has the potential to define the. next century. >> And I think you could argue that the AI. race is even more important than the. space race because it's going to. determine who reshapes the global. economy and who the superpowers of the. 21st century are going to be.

>> And on the other hand, he's also focused. on the economic opportunity of this. technology and how can the United States. harness that economic opportunity. There's a reason that our economy is. driven by tech now and it's because of a. largely hands-off approach [music]. during a previous era. >> Mhm. So, given just how. entrenched this thinking appears to be. inside the Trump administration, embraced by the president and the person.

that the president turns to for advice. on the AI industry, what ultimately. changes. this thinking and leads to the executive. order? >> In April, the entire tech industry got a. wake-up call and so did Washington. And. that is because Anthropic, which is one. of the leading developers of artificial. intelligence in the country, announced. that it had made a new model called. Mythos that it said was very skilled at.

detecting and identifying. vulnerabilities in software and could be. weaponized by people who wanted to do. cyberattacks. And all of a sudden, everybody starts to think, "Oh goodness, like what are the downside. risk here? Like what are the. possibilities?". >> And what are the possibilities? >> These are really powerful systems and. they can be used by bad actors to hack. into the electric grid or hack into bank. accounts, to steal money, to all of a. sudden overnight turn off all the lights.

in New York City and create mass panic. Anthropic said that it was so dangerous. that it couldn't even release it to the. public and instead was creating a. bespoke group of 40 companies that were. going to get early access to this model. so that they could figure out how it. might be used to find vulnerabilities in. their software systems. And concerns about this new model. reverberate from the West Coast to the. East Coast. First you have Microsoft, which has.

written most of the software code that. the US government relies on, calling the. administration and saying, "Hey, this is. a big deal. You need to take this. seriously." And then on the East Coast, you have figures like Jamie Dimon. putting calls into the administration. and saying, "Look, like this is a risk. for banks. You all need to take this. seriously.". >> Jamie Dimon, of course, being the CEO of. JP Morgan Chase, the banking giant. >> Right. And this gets the ear of Scott. Bessent and Susie Wiles. Scott Bessent.

being the Treasury Secretary, Susie. Wiles being the Chief of Staff. They. worry that if there is a cyber attack, if there is some use of this technology. in a in a way that that shocks the. American public, that if the. administration continues to have a. hands-off approach, it will look like it. didn't enable that. And so they start to. talk about, "Well, what what could we. do? Like we we're literally doing. nothing now. How do we take a step.

forward of some sort [music] and begin. to get our arms around where this. technology is going in the future?". >> So all of a sudden, after this hands-off. approach has persisted and prevailed, there's now a countervailing force. inside the White House, Bessent and. Wiles saying, "Wait a minute. We could. have a real problem here. Let's slow. this down. Let's have a conversation.

about what actually a hands-on approach. might look like. And where does that. go?". >> In May, Scott Bessent and Susie Wiles. begin to organize conversations within. the administration about how it could. regulate the industry. And they begin. talking to AI companies about what. approaches might be okay with the. companies. Now, this is an administration that's trying. to walk a tightrope here, right? I mean, they have said that we are very. pro-innovation. We don't want any rules.

And so they don't want to fully abandon. that idea, but they want to also take a. baby step forward or some step forward. so that they do have some guardrails in. place. And what they wind up coming up. with is this idea of an up to 90-day. window when they could review artificial. intelligence models and assess whether. or not those models are capable of. finding software vulnerabilities. In. essence, it wouldn't tell.

tech companies what they can't do, but. it would allow the government to absorb. information about what their technology. can do so that the government is. prepared for that and can help other key. groups like banks and utilities also be. prepared for those risks. And so a draft. of the executive order as written, the. administration schedules assigning. ceremony in the Oval Office on Thursday, May 21st, and they begin to ask and.

invite chief executives to come to. Washington to be there for this event. And in the run-up to that event, a. couple of things. >> Joining me now is White House National. Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett. Kevin, it's great to have you this. morning. Welcome. >> Good to be here. >> One, Kevin Hassett, the head of the. National Economic Council, goes on Fox. TV. >> doing we're studying possibly an. executive order to give a clear road map. to everybody about how future AIs that. also potentially create vulnerabilities.

should go through a process so that, you. know, they're released into the wild. after they've been proven safe, just. like an FDA drug. >> and describes the process that they're. considering as something akin to what. the FDA does for drug approvals. >> Mhm. >> An FDA for AI that would vet, you heard. that correct, folks, that would vet new. models for safety, the thing we've been. talking about not doing here, the thing. David Sacks. >> This freaks out Silicon Valley.

constituents and leads to real worry. that the administration's going to slow. down the development of artificial. intelligence and basically just slam the. brakes on it. In the same way that it's. like really hard to get a new drug out. the door, they fear that it's going to. be really hard to get new artificial. intelligence models out the door. And. Thursday morning rolls around and it's. time for President Trump to gear up to. sign. this executive order.

And that morning. he begins to get skeptical about it and. say, "What what is this on my calendar?". And he calls he starts calling. he starts calling tech executives and. saying, "Hey, what do you think of. this?" And so he he speaks to a number. of tech executives including Mark. Zuckerberg, Marc Andreessen the venture. capitalist who has a tremendous amount. of influence on the White House and most. importantly David Sacks. And David Sacks. tells him directly, "Don't sign this. This is a bad idea.".

And. within a few hours of that the. president's on TV doing another event. >> Why is today's executive order on AI. been postponed and. >> Because I didn't like certain aspects of. it. I postponed it. I think it gets in. the way of. you know we're leading China we're. leading everybody and I don't want to do. anything that's going to get in the way. of. >> And he says that he's canceling the. executive order he's signing of it. because he's concerned that it's going. to create rules that slow down the.

industry. >> Uh I I really thought that could have. been a blocker and I want to make sure. that it's not. >> [clears throat]. >> This feels like a pretty decisive. victory for the AI industry and for the. David Sacks faction of those advising. the president but we know that it's a. temporary victory because Trump does end. up signing some version of an executive. order. So, after he changes his mind and.

cancels the first one, what makes him want to sign it all over. again? >> There's persistence from Susie Wiles and. Scott Bessent that something still needs. to happen. And over. roughly the 2 weeks that follow, they. continue to push this notion forward and. the president convenes a meeting this. Monday at the White House with David. Sacks, Scott Bessent, Defense Secretary Pete.

Hoekstra, and other principals who have. a vested interest in this. And they. basically wrestle with, "How do we get. this done?". And in the course of that conversation, there are a few changes made to the. executive order. One is that that 90-day. window is reduced to up to 30 days. >> So, cut down by a third. That's a lot. >> Yeah, that's a lot. And there's there's. a line added about how nothing in the. executive order can be construed to.

authorize a mandatory government. licensing, pre-clearance, or permitting. process to be put in place. >> Mhm. >> Those changes. win David Sacks' blessing and on Tuesday. morning. with almost with zero fanfare and no. advance notice to tech companies, uh the White House posted a notification. on its website saying that President. Trump has signed the executive order and. it is now policy.

>> Hm. Well, given how watered down this. executive order ultimately becomes, from. 90 days to 30 days with all these. stipulations of what it's not, and given. how quietly. Trump signed it, how should we think about. this regulation and how meaningful or. not it really is? >> It is small by design, no doubt about. it. But, it shows how the ground has. shifted in Washington on AI policy.

And the door is now been cracked open to. have a bigger conversation about whether. or not there should be other rules or. regulations in the future. Remember, this technology is moving really, really. fast, and everyone was blindsided in. April. So, you know, trying to catch up. to where the technology is going is. where a lot of people's head is right. now in Washington. >> [music].

[music]. >> We'll be right back. Tripp, I want to turn to this bigger. conversation that's happening in. Washington about what the right level of. regulation for AI is. I mean, obviously. the way that the factions inside the. White House resolve this debate was. through this baby step of this executive.

order. My sense is that beyond the White. House, there's less interest in just. baby steps. >> Yes, I mean, and there has been a steady. drumbeat that has increased in volume. over the past year. And it's coming from. two sides of the country politically. It's coming from populists on the left, people like Bernie Sanders, and. populists on the right, people like. Steve Bannon. They would all like to see the. government take a more heavy-handed role.

in regulating artificial intelligence. Largely because this is a really. disruptive technology. It's going to. have huge ramifications for the country, and they believe that there's not being. enough done to put the government at the. forefront of where it's going. >> Well, let's start with the populist on. the right and what's motivating their. concerns about AI. >> Artificial intelligence in a free. society are totally and completely.

incompatible. Let me repeat that. Artificial intelligence in a free. society are absolutely and totally. incompatible, full [snorts]. freaking stop. >> [music]. >> Steve Bannon has long been skeptical of. Big Tech. >> A lot of the bro oligarchs. >> and tech [clears throat] bro oligarchs. as he calls them. >> It's not that I don't think AI has. tremendous benefits. It obviously does. But, um.

>> [music]. >> the downside is so unlimited. >> Because he's really concerned that. they're going to sell out the American. public, enrich themselves, and they're. going to do it without any transparency. or any accountability. >> I think [music] that artificial. intelligence that we have to have even. more than regulation. I think we need. even something like a. Geneva Treaty or some sort of arms. treaty. This thing is very dangerous, very dangerous. >> And that's where he wants the government. to step in and provide some rules for.

the road. >> And I am a more of a hardliner in this. than anything else I've ever been a. hardliner on. >> He hasn't been real explicit about what. those rules should be, but he's. definitely channeled what he believes is. the anger building of working-class. people and the uneasiness of. working-class people who are seeing this. big transformative technology barreling. down the tracks at them and feeling like. nobody's in the engine room steering the. train.

>> Right. And he ultimately worries that. these AI bro oligarchs are going to. force Trump to sell out his own base. because Bannon was at the heart of. creating the Trump political message. that appealed so powerfully to that. forgotten American worker. >> Exactly. And the interesting thing about. this is it's not just an economic. argument that's gotten momentum within. the mega base. There's also a moral. argument that's been building as well.

I stumbled upon this by talking to a. pastor in Texas. You know, in a. conversation with this pastor, I was. like, why did you become part of the uh. AI opposition movement? And he started. doing it because he met with a. parishioner who told him a story about a. friend whose marriage was on the rocks. because he was having a relationship. with an AI companion and it had. completely destroyed and gutted the. relationship he had with his wife. You. know, and this pastor is concerned about.

how many other people might wind up in. the same situation in the future. >> Right. Basically, AI is a road to. perdition, a kind of moral rot. >> Right. And like, what stress and strain. does this put on kind of the moral. fabric of America? >> Mhm. >> And this isn't an isolated thing. There. were more than three dozen pastors who. signed onto a letter with Steve Bannon. urging the Trump administration to. actually sign this executive order that. we spent time talking about. They just.

want somebody to take the wheel and they. don't want that somebody to be the tech. industry that seems to have the. president's ear. >> I wonder if these pastors and Steve. Bannon. are compelled by the executive order the. president signed just a couple days ago. >> Not really. I mean, they feel like it's. a step forward, but they'd like to see a. bigger step taken. And when I asked one. of the organizers of the letter, what. would you like to really see happen? They said that one of the things that.

they're supportive of is a bipartisan. piece of legislation that Senator Josh. Hawley of Missouri advanced. that would create a national AI system. to evaluate more rigorously and like on. a mandatory basis. artificial intelligence models before. they're released. >> So something firmer than what the. president is proposing which is. voluntary a forced. basically pre-clearance review process. in which the government determines.

whether something is safe enough when it. comes to AI to be used by corporations. and all of us. >> Exactly. >> Okay. So what about the populace on the. left specifically Senator Bernie Sanders. who you mentioned a little bit earlier. What's he calling for? >> Yeah, first of all it's worth noting. that Bernie Sanders has just gone deep. on artificial intelligence. >> [music]. >> Claude, this is Senator Bernie Sanders. >> He's interacting and doing interviews. with Claude the Anthropic system. >> I have been taking a hard look.

>> [music]. >> at how AI. impacts American society. in terms of economics and job loss in. terms of. >> [music]. >> the mental health of our kids in terms. of what it will do to the political. process. >> He's really trying to immerse himself in. this technology and where it's going and. he's made two proposals. >> Given the speed at which AI is. developing. >> [music]. >> and the impact it's going to have on so. many aspects of our life.

would you support a moratorium. on the development of new AI data. centers? >> One of which is a moratorium on. artificial intelligence and when I spoke. to Bernie Sanders and asked him about. this moratorium which probably doesn't. have a real shot of becoming law. he said one of the things that's kind of. shocking to him. >> [music]. >> is that given that AI and robotics are. going to impact every man woman and. child in the country you would think.

that Congress would be talking about. this. >> [music]. >> And yet, the conversations about. artificial intelligence aren't really. happening on Capitol Hill. And so, that's part of the reason that he's. throwing his weight around and trying to. introduce legislation that really sparks. conversation. And the [music] second. proposal may be even more radical than. the first. >> But Mr. President, the time has come for. us to reclaim what was stolen from us.

>> And that is that the United States. should take a 50% ownership stake in all. of the biggest artificial intelligence. companies as they go public. >> I will be introducing the American AI. Sovereign Wealth Fund Act. This. legislation would give the public a. direct ownership stake in the largest AI. companies [music] in our country. >> So, when Anthropic and OpenAI have their. IPOs later this year, as they've said.

they plan to do, he said that the US. should get a 50% share of that. It. should go in a AI Sovereign Wealth Fund, and that the entire country should share. the profits [music] and wealth of those. companies as they continue to grow and. develop. >> Bottom line, >> [music]. >> the future of AI and the fate of. humanity must not be decided behind. closed doors by the wealthiest people in. the world. [music]. It is our future. We must decide it.

Let's get it done. >> That's about as far as you can possibly. imagine from the president's baby step. of give us 30 days to evaluate the. safety of something before it goes out. in the world voluntarily. This would be. the government. owning, controlling the industry. night and day. >> Yeah, it's a big radical leap from where. the president is at the moment.

>> And suffice it to say. the AI industry not a fan of this. proposal. >> It was largely met with shock in Silicon. Valley and ridicule from people who. think it's basically unacceptable. socialism. >> At this point, given how much of a. desire we can see on both sides of the. populous wings of the parties for. regulation of AI, what is the industry actually willing to. accept at the moment?

>> The industry at the same time these. conversations are happening, seems to be. recognizing that it has a big problem. with the American public at the moment. That it's got a trust deficit. I mean, that's pretty clear based on the polling. data that's been coming out, based on. the rise and AI opposition, and then. based on like a very violent act that. happened here in San Francisco. A. Molotov cocktail was thrown at Sam. Altman's home. Sam Altman being the CEO.

of OpenAI. And that was a bit of a. wake-up call for everybody in terms of. making people recognize that developing. this technology without any rules also. has risks for the companies who are. pushing it forward. And so, what you've. seen in the wake of the executive order, and we're just talking like days, Michael. Like we're this is just a few. days later. OpenAI came out on Wednesday. with its own post encouraging Congress.

to sit down and adopt more rigorous. rules for the artificial intelligence. industry. Now, this is a company that. has largely opposed rules up until this. point. And that to me just speaks to the. type of shift that's taking place right. now. >> Hm. But, is that a genuine request by a. major AI company to be regulated? Is. that just a public relations gesture? This is also an industry that spends a. lot of money in American politics,

almost all of which seems to be directed. at electing candidates who will not want. to be regulating the industry. >> It's a great question. As somebody who. covers the industry, it's hard to figure. out at times where Silicon Valley is. going on this. And OpenAI is a good example. It's pushing forward this notion that. democratic governments, not private. companies alone, should determine the rules and. safeguards for the technology that it's. developing. At the same time, one of its.

founders, Greg Brockman, is spending. money to try to ensure that the people. being elected to public office support a. relatively hands-off approach, if not a. totally hands-off approach, to. artificial intelligence. >> Right. I mean, I have the question of. whether. in the end, what ultimately may lead to meaningful. regulation of this industry is.

what leads to meaningful regulation of. any industry, which is some sort of. massive crisis. And the two that come to. mind. are the FAA, the regulatory body over. the commercial airline industry. That. comes into existence after there are. many plane crashes. In the 1950s, the. government says, "We need a regulatory. body to deal with this.". After the financial crisis in 2008, the. US government wakes up and says, "We.

need a much more robust set of. regulations around banks and derivatives. and American finance." And so, we get. that regulatory scheme. Is that just at. this point the most likely scenario. in which we get meaningful regulation. for AI. Something goes quite badly. wrong. >> Given the paralysis on Capitol Hill, I. think that's the right way of looking at. this. That there.

there needs to be not just a mythos that. isn't released publicly, but there needs. to be a mythos that has been released, and the lights need to go out in New. York City or something like that, right? Maybe that's what moves the ball forward. on this. But at the same time though, you know, talking about this, I can't help but. think that here we are in what, 15 years into the social media. revolution that Facebook brought about, we've been dealing with tremendous.

polarization as a consequence of that. There've been mental health issues for. young people. There've been concerns. about child sexual abuse material. >> Right, there've been crisis on top of. crisis. >> And there's not been a single rule. written, right? That segment of the tech. industry remains unregulated. And so, I can't help but look at this and. wonder, could this kind of nascent. segment of the tech industry, artificial. intelligence, also just run out the. clock in perpetuity? >> Right, you're raising the real prospect.

that tech and AI may defy the history of. crisis and regulation in this country. that we've had with most industry. >> It has so far. And it's got a really big bully stick. that it's carrying around. And that is. how much it is driving the US economy. And we're talking about a third to more. than half of GDP growth at this moment. is coming from artificial intelligence.

and the build out of artificial. intelligence. >> Wow. >> And that is a big reason that it took so. long for this executive order to be. enacted. But at the same time, many those. economic benefits aren't being. distributed broadly to everyone. I mean, they're flowing to the few. >> Mhm. >> Across a broad swath of the country, what people are living with are. anxieties about what this technology is. going to do. Is it going to eliminate my. job? Is it going to result in a data.

center in the backyard? Is it going to. break up a family? If those pain points begin to bleed from. the progressive populist wing and the. MAGA populist wing of the country into a. broader swath of the public, [music]. then the pressure to take action and. have real regulation will be impossible. to ignore.

>> Will Trip, thank you very much. We appreciate it. >> Thanks so much for [music] having me. >> We'll be right back.

>> [music]. >> Here's what else you need to know to be. informed. >> On this vote, the yays are 215 and the. nays are 208. The concurrent resolution is adopted. >> [music]. >> On Wednesday, the Republican-controlled. House of Representatives. >> [music]. >> voted to direct President Trump to. withdraw US forces from the war with.

Iran or win approval from Congress to. continue it. Four Republicans sided [music] with. Democrats in a sign of the growing. bipartisan opposition to a conflict that. is now in its fourth [music] month. The vote is seen as largely symbolic. because even if the legislation makes. its way to Trump's desk, >> [music]. >> he's expected to veto it. Meanwhile, [music]. Iran fired a barrage of missiles and.

drones at two US allies, Kuwait and. Bahrain, undermining the claim made [music] by. the Trump administration that the war is. over. The attacks in Kuwait proved deadly. [music]. Iran struck Kuwait's International. Airport, killing one person, injuring. scores of others, >> [music]. >> and setting an airport terminal on fire. Today's episode [music]. was produced by Caitlyn O'Keefe, Asta.

Chaturvedi, and Diana Win. It was edited [music] by Mark George and. Annie Minnoff, and contains music by Marion Lozano, Dan. Powell, [music] and Diane Wong. Our theme music is by Wonderly. This episode was engineered by Alyssa. Moxley. >> [music].

>> That's it for The [music] Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.