A panel joins'Fox News @ Night' to weigh in on a voter sentiment poll about the incoming Trump administration, Chinese President Xi Jinping's invitation to the presidential inauguration, and efforts by Trump Cabinet nominees to court senators. President-elect Donald Trump unleashed a slew of nominations on Sunday night, naming several new people to serve in his forthcoming administration. In several Truth Social posts on Sunday, Trump introduced various experts to work in the White House on issues ranging from defense to technology to budgeting. The Republican leader began by naming Stephen Alexander Vaden as his nominee for deputy secretary of the Department of Agriculture. "In my First Term, Stephen was the General Counsel of the Department of Agriculture, and a Member of the Board of the Commodity Credit Corporation, where he won two cases before the United States Supreme Court, relocated and reorganized the Agencies that comprise the Department to better serve Rural America, and engaged in substantial regulatory reform," Trump wrote in a post.

If the presidential election has provided relief from anything, it has been the generative-AI boom. Neither Kamala Harris nor Donald Trump has made much of the technology in their public messaging, and they have not articulated particularly detailed AI platforms. Bots do not seem to rank among the economy, immigration, abortion rights, and other issues that can make or break campaigns. Americans are very invested, and very worried, about the future of artificial intelligence. Polling consistently shows that a majority of adults from both major parties support government regulation of AI, and that demand for regulation might even be growing.

This study examines the extent to which U.S. federal agencies responded to and implemented the principles outlined in the White House's October 2022 "Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights." The Blueprint provided a framework for the ethical governance of artificial intelligence systems, organized around five core principles: safety and effectiveness, protection against algorithmic discrimination, data privacy, notice and explanation about AI systems, and human alternatives and fallback. Through an analysis of publicly available records across 15 federal departments, the authors found limited evidence that the Blueprint directly influenced agency actions after its release. Only five departments explicitly mentioned the Blueprint, while 12 took steps aligned with one or more of its principles. However, much of this work appeared to have precedents predating the Blueprint or motivations disconnected from it, such as compliance with prior executive orders on trustworthy AI. Departments' activities often emphasized priorities like safety, accountability and transparency that overlapped with Blueprint principles, but did not necessarily stem from it. The authors conclude that the non-binding Blueprint seems to have had minimal impact on shaping the U.S. government's approach to ethical AI governance in its first year. Factors like public concerns after high-profile AI releases and obligations to follow direct executive orders likely carried more influence over federal agencies. More rigorous study would be needed to definitively assess the Blueprint's effects within the federal bureaucracy and broader society.

The president speaks after meeting with AI experts in effort to manage its risks. The Biden administration is actively seeking to use artificial intelligence to promote a woke, progressive ideology with left-wing activists leading the effort, according to research from a conservative watchdog group. The American Accountability Foundation conducted research into the administration's plans for AI and is now warning in a memo that top U.S. officials under President Biden are seeking to inject "dangerous ideologies" into AI systems. "Under the guise of fighting'algorithmic discrimination' and'harmful bias,' the Biden administration is trying to rig AI to follow the woke left's rules," AAF president Tom Jones told Fox News Digital. "Biden is being advised on technology policy, not by scientists, but by racially obsessed social academics and activists. We're already seen the biggest tech firms in the world, like Google under Eric Schmidt, use their power to push the left's agenda. This would take the tech/woke alliance to a whole new, truly terrifying level."

The Biden administration on Tuesday sought input from the public on how to ensure artificial intelligence develops in a way that supports "equity" and civil rights and helps "underserved communities," as part of a broader plan to promote "responsible" AI. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) announced it is seeking input from any interested party on how to reach these and other goals as AI systems are developed. Policymakers and AI developers are increasingly in agreement on the need for federal rules, and possibly even a new federal agency, to ensure the risks of AI are managed. To inform this work, OSTP asked a series of questions on how to protect people's rights and safety as AI systems become more widely used, as well as questions related to "advancing equity and strengthening civil rights. HERE'S HOW AI IS BEING USED TO UNLOCK SECRETS STILL HIDDEN IN THE HUMAN BRAIN President Biden on Tuesday released a new plan for government research into AI, and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is asking how to make sure AI boosts'equity.' (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images) "What are the opportunities for AI to enhance equity and how can these be fostered?" "For example, what are the potential benefits for AI in enabling broadened prosperity, expanding economic and educational opportunity, increasing access to services, and advancing civil rights?

On Tuesday 4 October, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy released a blueprint for an AI bill of rights. The aim is "to help guide the design, development, and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) and other automated systems so that they protect the rights of the American public." The bill outlines five protections that everyone in America should have with regards to artificial intelligence. To accompany these five principles, the full blueprint document contains a technical companion which considers each principle and provides examples and concrete steps for communities, industry, governments, and others to take in order to build these protections into policy, practice, or the technological design process.

As data-driven technologies transform the world and artificial intelligence raises questions about bias, privacy and transparency, Suresh Venkatasubramanian is offering his expertise to help create guardrails to ensure that technologies are developed and deployed responsibly. "We need to protect the American people and make sure that technology is used in ways that reinforce our highest values," said Venkatasubramanian, a professor of computer science and data science at Brown University. On the heels of a recently concluded 15-month appointment as an advisor to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Venkatasubramanian returned to Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, Oct. 4, for the unveiling of "A Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: Making Automated Systems Work for the American People," during a ceremony at the White House. Venkatasubramanian said the blueprint represents the culmination of 14 months of research and collaboration led by the Office of Science and Technology Policy with partners across the federal government, academia, civil society, the private sector and communities around the country. That collaboration informed the development of the first-ever national guidance focused on the use and deployment of automated technologies that have the potential to impact people's rights, opportunities and access to services.

More than fifty years after a research group at Dartmouth University launched work on a new field called "Artificial Intelligence," the United States still lacks a national strategy on artificial intelligence (AI) policy. The growing urgency of this endeavor is made clear by the rapid progress of both U.S. allies and adversaries. The European Union is moving forward with two initiatives of far-reaching consequence. The EU Artificial Intelligence Act will establish a comprehensive, risk-based approach for the regulation of AI when it is adopted in 2023. Many anticipate that the EU AI Act will extend the "Brussels Effect" across the AI sector as the earlier European data privacy law, the General Data Privacy Regulation, did for much of the tech industry.

President Biden came into office promising to restore the role of science in government after the Trump administration's rocky relationship with scientific advice. A key tool for the White House to implement its ambitious science-related agenda is the Office of Science and Technology Policy, or OSTP--a relatively small outfit that oversees policies about science, including budget requests for agencies that conduct science and the coordination of major scientific endeavors across the federal government. Since Biden took office, OSTP has taken on a variety of sorely needed priorities, including reinvigorating government processes for scientific integrity, future pandemic preparedness, and exploring what artificial intelligence means for human rights. But these good causes have been overshadowed by controversies over OSTP's leadership. Politico recently broke a story about billionaire and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt's close ties to the Biden administration's OSTP.

Last fall, Politico reporter Alex Thompson wrote a short news story about President Biden's then-science adviser, Eric Lander, and how he was driving everyone in the White House crazy. Then, after writing that article, Thompson got an anonymous tip about Lander's mistreatment of his staff, which included lawyer Rachel Wallace. Wallace alleged that Lander bullied her and retaliated against her for raising ethical red flags about his behavior. One of those red flags was about Eric Lander's closeness with another Eric, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and Lander's desire for Schmidt's foundation, Schmidt Futures, to help fund the White House science office. After Thompson wrote about the bullying allegations, Lander resigned from the administration under pressure.