Discussed AIACT.IN, and Whether to Comply with so many AI Laws or not with Saiyam Pathak

From Abhivardhan, our Chairperson, ft. Saiyam Pathak & Kubesimplify

By now, most of you must have come across the news that OpenAI and Google are asking the Trump Administration in the US to "more access to government-held or government-supported data" as per their public submissions (read: https://cdn.openai.com/global-affairs/ostp-rfi/ec680b75-d539-4653-b297-8bcf6e5f7686/openai-response-ostp-nsf-rfi-notice-request-for-information-on-the-development-of-an-artificial-intelligence-ai-action-plan.pdf).

Their claim is that DeepSeek's advantages around regulatory arbitrage as a Chinese entity gives them advantage over American companies. Obviously, the whole policy claim is misleading, by OpenAI, and they should not be given an open hand. They had the resources (still have) and yet even MSFT can't trust them anymore.

Speaking of this, AI and law frameworks are mushrooming across the globe out of anxiety, and to map India's regulatory and legal landscape, I had drafted India's first privately proposed bill, aiact.in. It was fun to draft multiple versions of it since I received some awesome feedback, but that experience made me rethink how the Chinese developed their administrative law regulations (as nicely described by Raymond Sun in his posts).

That's why it was fun discussing the lack of standardisation of consumer liability frameworks in the case of preview-based AI applications, with Saiyam Pathak for Kubesimplify's YouTube Channel.

Watch this fun discussion, you would just enjoy the 50+ mins:

But yes, on Altman's recommendations to Trump, and his rather odd statement on his child not being able to be 'better' than AI - what do you think?