28 ms·

US AI Action Plan

• octopoc 1y ago
  And so it begins. Both the US president and the president of China have demonstrated they see AI as a competition between their respective countries. This will be an interesting ride, if nothing else.
  • trod1234 1y ago
    Yeah, two crabs locked in a cage as it spirals down the drain. Looks like plans to leave, for finding safe harbor elsewhere, have accelerated from the initial projection of 2030
    • ourguile 1y ago
      Interesting that you mention it, because the NYT just released their ethicist commentary from today and the question was "how do I tell my rich friends to stop talking about fleeing the country": https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/23/magazine/rich-friends-fleeing-country-ethics.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Yk8.J9EN.xvj5r8VxJEDp&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/23/magazine/rich-friends-fle...
      • trod1234 1y ago
        Well I'm not rich, and I'm not your friend, it takes a bit to earn friendship and friends have an privileged place in what is conveyed to them; but I do provide unconditional goodwill towards most people in the things that I say when asked, because it costs me nothing to do so and it provides towards others betterment putting more good out into the world. The sad fact is, if you haven't lived outside the U.S. for at least 3-6 months independently (working/not on savings), you don't have a sound reference to understand or accurately assess the reality of these types of articles because the narratives broadcast 24/7 don't align with reality; and its something most people can't believe despite it being true, my guess is solely as a result of systematized indoctrination. That article is pretty bad in terms of subtle manipulation, gaslighting, and pushing a false narrative (propaganda). TL;DR Its trash. The article chose that question of the many possible questions because its a straw-man and its divisive. It appeals to emotion, mischaracterizing the intent of the communications, and purposefully omitting valid reasons such conversations might occur. Neglecting realities. The underlying purpose seems to bias towards several things. If you ask yourself who benefits from that rhetoric you get a short list. The bias is towards Villifying the rich, keep people in the US, where they are dependent on the US currency, and dependent on the worsening disadvantaged environment; polarize, isolate, and promote disunity along social class lines; befuddling the masses towards ends which have no actionable outcomes (wasting time and resources on a political party). The math of first-passed-the-post voting has been in for quite a long time. 2 parties exceeding 33% of the vote can lock out any third competitor. All you need is a degree of cooperation, and play-acting and one party pretending to be two can do so, by lying. Political capture from SuperPACs and party primaries means your vote doesn't count after a certain point. Money-printing via the FED, laundered through many private companies enabled this. Additionally, quite a lot of things are omitted; like the historic facts that countries that are locked into a trend of decreasing geopolitical power have their population suffer greatly, and some just collapse. The Chaos lowers chances of survival, and the chaos is limited to the places that country influences. The history of Spain following and during the Spanish inquisition as an example. You make plans to leave an area when saying means there is no foreseeable predictable or sound future, and there is nothing you can do to change that outcome. This geo-political dynamic is well known in history, often referred to or called as "seeking empire", and the downside is forced once hegemony is achieved for any significant period of time; all empires fall. Rome being a standard archetype. The article draws a false comparison between all other countries and communist states. If you leave, your a communist - is implied. The article conflates warnings with good intentions as obnoxious, shutting discussion down (isolation), and promoting resentment aimed at those rich friends. It also neglects the disparity of education (quality), and experience, that often occurs as a result of having more resources to begin with. Subtly conveying through implication that you shouldn't listen to intelligent educated people because they are rich. I could go much deeper, but I think this sufficiently makes my point. If you fall for that trite garbage, just imagine how unprepared and what your odds are when SHTF. The hopeless dependent pays the highest price in cost as consequences of choice realize and become outcomes. Those who don't accept and communicate important knowledge isolate and blind themselves, and they get wiped out when something outside their perceptual context creates existential threats. Like a tsunami that started on the horizon, and the receding ocean along the coast a little bit before. These indicators only became major indicators after deaths occurred.
        • roboror 1y ago
          >If you fall for that trite garbage, just imagine how unprepared and what your odds are when SHTF. How do you propose the average person prepares for when SHTF? Do you expect 300 million+ people to flee the country at a moments notice? This reads like satire of the person the article is about.
          • trod1234 1y ago
            Being serious, the demographics of what is coming are beyond catastrophic. People that have the ability to leave and are under 40 should by 2030-2033. If staying, the average person should prepare by educating themselves and practicing skills they will need before the need becomes life sustaining, and accruing the needed resources and experience on how to make the things they will need themselves; from scratch. The level of learning that is going to be required is beyond what PHd's can manage. We're talking practical working knowledge of chemistry, material science, engineering, agriculture, and medicine (without all the technological dependencies), and tactical/military guns & ordinance for defense. This is not as unusual as you'd think, as these skills are often needed in places outside the US. The best and brightest will leave, just as they did prior to Hitler's rise to power. The ones that stay will not be able to afford basic necessities and the cost of living is going to explode following rent-seeking behavior as the old offsets. Laws will be changed to a rule by law, the prospects that stay will most likely have to become outlaws to survive and have the means to do so forcefully. There is a very good chance order breaks down when worker shortages cannot be corrected, production falls, and austerity measures are imposed. Employment will become quite scarce, as money-printing gets worse. Food may become scarce, and the ones at most risk are the younger ones because they weren't given a choice and won't recognize the dangers in this chaotic environment. To give you perspective on the hard numbers. There are only roughly 340 million people in the US a/o 2025. 119.3 million are above the age of 50 (35%), and their chosen leadership control the majority of political power and monetary resources to the point where the remainder of the population have very little voice. They will follow the same flawed path of the history books, holding onto it until age and circumstance take them. This isn't a new development, its been this way since 2000 when the generational shift which was supposed to occur in politics didn't. That leaves 220.6 million to make up for the boomers, and their spendthrift policies (64.8%) to pay those IOUs the boomer's policies have forced on us all and have been printing for the last 50 years... but wait, not really. 82.4 million are under the age of ~18 and can't work, and likely won't be able to work at the same production level given the poor schooling they received and degradation brought on by lack of reading comprehension. So in reality your national workforce is only 138.2 million (40% of the population), and that same population accounts for ~80% of the birthrate which must have at least 2 kids for replacement breakeven but they can't feed/shelter themselves independently. We are at 1.67 and worsening. This same group must also somehow work at the same time to make up for the other two thirds, with narrowing prospects over time because the debt trap was set before they were ever born. Those that don't leave will be forced to work, and they won't be able to have kids without resources which are being hoarded and stolen by the old who have enabled corporations to do this on their behalf and engaged in political capture to prevent change. You can either have these people work, or you can have them make babies; you can't have them do both. The dynamics are worse than Japan if you shift&match them up to the same progression, and the US bailed japan out a number of times. No ones around that will bail us out, we're at the top which makes the fall all the more painful. All signs point to dramatic depopulation event, complete loss of purchasing power from runaway debt service, and negative replacement rates as the spiral worsens and inflation/debasement come home to roost. The bill from money printing always comes due, the boomers chose to have their children pay for the extravagant lives they lived at the expense of everyone else. There are exceptions because its a spectrum, but overall these are the choices their generation made in aggregate. I haven't even touched on the silent crisis of 30+ years olds (both men and women) today who aren't having sex at all. The numbers for this demographic are hard to come by, but its almost side-by-side with singapore (0.8) if you take some less firm numbers. The dating app epidemic is basically poisoning people's minds, and is utilizing the same strategy the USDA uses to eradicate parasites, through structured sterility; for profit. Contraception coupled with faux matches that guarantee customers keep coming back and are never happy who will never match up longterm with someone compatible; these designs toward profit run down that biological clock just like the above strategy by the USDA (where the parasites referenced have a very short biological clock time-frame). The only thing that could have possibly helped was increasing immigration drastically. Obviously with the recent ICE roundups and detention facilities being erected, this is no longer an option. When you fail to plan, you plan to fail. People who are under 40 should seriously be considering finding safe harbor in any country but here. Demographics are brutal, they don't change, they don't care, and they lag so by the time you see the problem if you don't pay attention, there is nothing you can do, and people didn't want to listen to the experts at the time when it could have been turned around. Such is the legacy of the boomers. It will be worse than anything seen in the past 5-6 generations, and we've seen grizzly. I'm not touching on climate change, that also has to be handled alongside 20+ other existential threats in the same time period. When you kick enough cans up in the air enough times eventually they all land down at the same time. This is the future left to the unprepared, coddled, and hobbled young. The odds against survival are so high.
  • bgwalter 1y ago
    Xi JinPing warns against "AI" overinvestment: https://www.ft.com/content/9c19d26f-57b3-4754-ac20-eeb627e8723e https://www.ft.com/content/9c19d26f-57b3-4754-ac20-eeb627e87... I haven't heard anything like that from a Western politician. Newspapers and investment analysts warn though.
    • frm88 1y ago
      The linked article is paywalled and not in the archive? Would you be so kind to put it there? Thanks in advance.
  • j_timberlake 1y ago
    Considering they both lie shamelessly, it means jack shit, as much as a 1000% tariff threat.
  • TrackerFF 1y ago
    Gotta get Allied Mastercomputer going.
• Mobius01 1y ago
  Removing Red Tape and Onerous Regulation Ensure that Frontier AI Protects Free Speech and American Values Encourage Open-Source and Open-Weight AI Enable AI Adoption Empower American Workers in the Age of AI Support Next-Generation Manufacturing Invest in AI-Enabled Science Build World-Class Scientific Datasets Advance the Science of AI 9 Invest in AI Interpretability, Control, and Robustness Breakthroughs Build an AI Evaluations Ecosystem Accelerate AI Adoption in Government Drive Adoption of AI within the Department of Defense Protect Commercial and Government AI Innovations Combat Synthetic Media in the Legal System I can’t take this seriously, as recent actions by this administration directly contradicts a few of these stated goals. Or maybe I don’t want to, because this sounds dangerous to me at this time.
  • neilcj 1y ago
    Don't regulate it except to push political goals sure seems like a recipe for success.
  • trod1234 1y ago
    Exactly. You said it. Anyone serious knows contradiction = lies. Words are cheap, actions matter.
  • msgodel 1y ago
    >Removing Red Tape and Onerous Regulation What red tape? Anyone can buy/rent a GPU(s) and train stuff.
    • jabjq 1y ago
      [flagged]
      • nerevarthelame 1y ago
        I read the PDF. The "Remove Red Tape and Onerous Regulation Recommended Policy Actions" don't cite to any specific existing regulations. It just references executive orders that vaguely demand any such regulations be eliminated. So it bears repeating: what red tape?
• lesuorac 1y ago
  > A coordinated Federal effort would be beneficial in establishing a dynamic, “try-first” culture for AI across American industry Move fast and break things I guess?
  • octopoc 1y ago
    Move faster so we get there first and control what breaks
• bananapub 1y ago
  [flagged]
• ivape 1y ago
  Why does this look like a website about weddings?
  • rafram 1y ago
    It does have a certain Sam & Jony feel to it: https://openai.com/sam-and-jony/ https://openai.com/sam-and-jony/
    • actionfromafar 1y ago
      I didn't know openai dabbled in satire...
    • Cornbilly 1y ago
      These people have completely disappeared up their own ass.
    • ivape 1y ago
      Ugh, can’t believe I missed their wedding. Also, the desktop version of the site is the one in question. Mobile looks like a pdf.
• AlanYx 1y ago
  The most important thing here IMHO is the strong stance taken towards open source and open weight AI models. This stance puts the US government at odds with some other regulatory initiatives like the EU AI Act (which doesn't outlaw open weight models and does have some exemptions below 10²⁵ FLOPS, but still places a fairly daunting regulatory burden on decentralized open projects).
  • wredcoll 1y ago
    I don't know if this counts as amazing optimism or just straight up blinders if that's your takeaway compared to the emphasis placed on non-renewable energy and government enforced ideology.
    • MrBuddyCasino 1y ago
      Current AIs are anything but politically neutral.
      • sbelskie 1y ago
        So the government should step in to dictate what neutrality means?
        • troyvit 1y ago
          Seriously. Is _that_ what it means to have a conservative government? Because I thought it meant they would keep their hands off the market. This is straight from the PDF though: "Led by the Department of Commerce (DOC) through the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), revise the NIST AI Risk Management Framework to eliminate references to misinformation, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and climate change."
        • AdamN 1y ago
          Isn't that why we have government? We have judges to make the final say on right and wrong and what the punishments are for transgressions, legislatures to make laws and allocate money based on the needs of the constituents, and an executive function to carry out the will of the stakeholders. Clearly there are terrible governments but if it's not government tackling these issues then there will be limited control by the people and it will simply be those with the most money define the landscape.
• OutOfHere 1y ago
  PDF: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Americas-AI-Action-Plan.pdf https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Americ...
• anon7000 1y ago
  It’s tough to have “human flourishing” (which they mention as a goal) when things like health insurance are in such a shit situation. AI could help health insurance deny more claims, for sure. That’s not human flourishing though. (And my biggest gripe with capitalism is that at a certain late stage in many sectors, human flourishing is completely at odds with making profit.)
  • GuinansEyebrows 1y ago
    They’re not talking about universal human flourishing. Just the subset of the investor class who stand to benefit.
    • jrockway 1y ago
      The investors can invest in the healthcare industry. More consumers of healthcare = more money for them!
• kelseyfrog 1y ago
  So the US government sees AI as a sphere of propaganda and wants AI output to align with political goals. Great. AI is going to be aligned, but in the worst way possible.
  • crinkly 1y ago
    Nailed it. No technology scares me. It's the hands it is in. xAI mechahitler was a warning.
• qrios 1y ago
  „Advance the Science of AI 9“? Is this a reference to the AMD chip, or just a fragment of a removed numbered list? Edit: It‘s a fragment of the PDF-to-HTML [1] 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44661843 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44661843
  • dpkirchner 1y ago
    It's a failed copy/paste from the pdf version of the same content. Wouldn't expect better from these clowns.
• gtoast 1y ago
  LOL Its awesome its the Trump administration guiding us through this delicate and important issue. Should turn out great.
• jjcm 1y ago
  I find it fascinating that the webpage has more pixels focused on Trump than AI.
• benrutter 1y ago
  I'm gonna ignore talking amount the abysmal current US administration and just share my immediate experience of using this site because it was funny to me: - I open the site in android mobile: "swwwoooooosh" a big slow animation reveals the text - After reading the the text I think I'll take a look at the home page: "swwooooooosh" the same animation rolls again as I load a very strange full screen image of Trump in black and white - I click the hamburger menu icon: "swwoooooosh" the four menu items slowly slide into full screen - There is visible no option to close the menu for me, I could probably refresh but decide I'm done here
  • yard2010 1y ago
    The closing mechanism was 2-15 prompts away. Don't forget that this is still a government website.
  • jacobgkau 1y ago
    Seeing as there are only four items in the menu, it seems if you open the menu and want to get back to the page you were already on, you're supposed to just click the title of the page you were on. The animations are a bit much. The scrolling horizontal rules repeating the words "AMERICA'S AI ACTION PLAN" underneath each "Pillar" header were confusing for a brief moment.
• lovich 1y ago
  There’s this whole section about biosecurity and how AI is going to help malicious actors synthesize nucleic acid(gotta get the word count up I guess is why they don’t say DNA) Then in the recommended policies it references multiple times that there will be nucleic acid testing set up to catch malicious “customers” Is this policy targeted towards the Covid lab leak conspiracy or are they just aiming for officially collecting everyone’s DNA samples? Maybe both
  • XorNot 1y ago
    No it's a longtermism ideology thing. For whatever reason they're terrified of some idea of "garage bio warfare" but have absolutely no understanding of how biology actually works so they've zeroed in on the idea that it's just: synthesize DNA -> superplague.
  • foxglacier 1y ago
    You must have not got the memo. The covid lab leak conspiracy theory turned out to be probably true and an actual conspiracy.
    • lovich 1y ago
      > Is this policy targeted towards the Covid lab leak conspiracy or are they just aiming for officially collecting everyone’s DNA samples? I did not use the word “theory” in my comment
• loco5niner 1y ago
  Quick exercise: just scrolling down, count how many pictures don't highlight one man front and center. https://www.ai.gov/ https://www.ai.gov/ Then click "fact sheets", "remarks", and "articles". He's everywhere. That's how unbiased this is going to be. (hint, the answer is one)
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • pjc50 1y ago
    What's American for "juche"?
    • educasean 1y ago
      MAGA
  • soulofmischief 1y ago
    I don't think a term yet exists for the practice of putting your name all over documents and media with such frequency that cleanup during following administrations takes several years, undermining and delegitimizing the new administration for your followers in the process. Some kind of sick soft power move that I expect we will be seeing a lot more of.
    • tonymet 1y ago
      [flagged]
      • tonymet 1y ago
        updoots for wittiness at least? thanks redditackernews
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • Cornbilly 1y ago
• mbgerring 1y ago
  This is suicide: > We need to build and maintain vast AI infrastructure and the energy to power it. To do that, we will continue to reject radical climate dogma and bureaucratic red tape, as the Administration has done since Inauguration Day. Simply put, we need to “Build, Baby, Build!”
  • darknavi 1y ago
    [flagged]
  • mbgerring 1y ago
    This is how you know these people are not serious: > Prioritize the interconnection of reliable, dispatchable power sources as quickly as possible and embrace new energy generation sources at the technological frontier (e.g., enhanced geothermal, nuclear fission, and nuclear fusion). Reform power markets to align financial incentives with the goal of grid stability, ensuring that investment in power generation reflects the system’s needs. None of these are "dispatchable power sources." Grid-scale batteries, for which technology and raw materials are abundant in the United States, are dispatchable power sources, and are, for some reason, not mentioned here. What they will actually do is eviscerate regulations to allow for more construction of natural gas power plants, but they won't mention that here, because any sane person would immediately identify that as a terrible idea.
    • twright 1y ago
      Additionally, the DOE has been pulling funds from interconnect projects that have been years in the works! Apparently there is a modest gas turbine shortage so even natural gas won’t get that far. I’d say it’s a great way to hit a hard wall fast but again, they are not serious. We’re gonna get nowhere fast, maybe even drift backwards a bit.
    • zamadatix 1y ago
      Nuclear fission is most often categorized as dispatchable, though it's typically in with the slowest of that group when it is. Of anything out of this administration, a push for more fission power might be the thing I agree with the most as well though, so perhaps that's biasing my read. Commercial nuclear fusion is just a dream at this point. We might as well debate whether my private island has enough room for an airplane runway or not instead. But hey, I'm not against continuing fusion research if that's all they mean. EGS I'm far less familiar with but it'd be odd for the current admin to agree with the previous admin unless they had to https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/EERE-ES-Enhancing-Geothermal-508.pdf https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/EERE-ES-E... and it would, on the surface, make sense one could design these systems to support flow rate variability? Grid scale batteries are power storage, not power sources. I do agree it's a damn shame they aren't brought up elsewhere in the report though. Same as anything else about renewables missing in tandem with that.
• childintime 1y ago
  [flagged]
  • childintime 1y ago
    [flagged]
    • tomhow 1y ago
      I don't know what any of this means but could you please not post like this on HN? I'm referring both to the inflammatory/conspiratorial content and the pattern of using Grawlix symbols in the names of political leaders. If you feel the need to do that in names, you'd be best to avoid using them or posting comments that contain them.
• dakial1 1y ago
  "Ensure that Frontier AI Protects Free Speech and American Values AI systems will play a profound role in how we educate our children, do our jobs, and consume media. It is essential that these systems be built from the ground up with freedom of speech and expression in mind, and that U.S. government policy does not interfere with that objective. We must ensure that free speech flourishes in the era of AI and that AI procured by the Federal government objectively reflects truth rather than social engineering agendas." It seems that everywhere free speech is mentioned today, the intent is to do the exactly opposite....
  • thewebguyd 1y ago
    [flagged]
    • simianparrot 1y ago
      It was the left and DEI until recently. The more things change the more they stay the same?
      • FirmwareBurner 1y ago
        Yep, remember asking in previous US administration and AIs like Gemini how many genders there are or to generate pictures of white Europeans. People forgot too quickly ho big of a no-no that was and now they seethe when the same speech censorship practices they approved of are used against their talking points. What I learned was that everyone's definition of censorship was: "everyone who disagrees with me".
        • saubeidl 1y ago
          One way or another, an LLM is a reflection of the ideology it was made from. That's why understanding ideology is important for understanding AI.
        • deleted 1y ago
          [deleted]
• Ancalagon 1y ago
  Defunding the education department will definitely help with that “skilled workforce” bit. Although I know Sacks doesn’t actually give a crap.
  • dinkumthinkum 1y ago
    I think you are conflating the concept of "education" and the US DoE. The U.S. spends more per pupil than any other nation. In fact, schools such as Baltimore public schools receive more funding than any other and have atrocious outcomes. This would be like saying someone being against a "Ministry of Truth" is someone that wants propaganda because "truth" is in the name.
• bgwalter 1y ago
  The summary is that they want to eliminate regulations to facilitate the steal and disregard consumer rights. And build data centers, as emphasized for the 100th time since inauguration. If Murdoch succeeds with his recent WSJ campaign and gets Trump to resign or similar, brace for Vance and the AI bros. These schemes are literally devised by people who funded cannabis and Adderall distribution sites and have done nothing noteworthy.
• mlsu 1y ago
  In the energy section, they talk about using nuclear fusion to power AI... but not solar. What a joke.
  • yoyohello13 1y ago
    [flagged]
    • dinkumthinkum 1y ago
      I don't know if they are woke but I think people vastly overestimate their efficacy and efficiency because they believe it means that they have correct opinions and are part of the group of "good people."
      • noodletheworld 1y ago
        “I don’t know if they’re woke” Yes you do. They’re not. > I think people vastly overestimate their efficacy and efficiency Of course, you can argue that people doctor the numbers (for example, failing to take into account the lifetime cost of nuclear power, or failing to note how hopelessly optimistic a pure solar power grid with no batteries might be) when they present said numbers… but the idea that any kind of power generation can be “woke” is beyond belief. That isn’t an adjective that can be applied to physical processes. Solar power is not woke. Gravity is not woke. Electricity is not woke. Don’t be daft.
      • rcxdude 1y ago
        >people vastly overestimate their efficacy and efficiency If anything, solar has demonstrated over the past 2 decades that it is a lot more effective and economical than even the most bullish of predictions that have been made about it. (Seriously, look at projections for solar deployment and generation vs what actually happened, it's kind of crazy how much it was underestimated)
  • josh-sematic 1y ago
    Technically solar power is just fusion power transmitted via photons across space. Maybe solar qualifies ;-)
• Thrymr 1y ago
  > Many of America’s most critical sectors, such as healthcare, are especially slow to adopt due to a variety of factors, including distrust or lack of understanding of the technology, a complex regulatory landscape, and a lack of clear governance and risk mitigation standards. A coordinated Federal effort would be beneficial in establishing a dynamic, “try-first” culture for AI across American industry. I'm sure "move fast and break things" will work out great for health care. And there are already "clear governance and risk mitigation standards" in health care, they're just not compatible with "try first" and use unproven things.
  • TZubiri 1y ago
    Welcome to our pitch for DenyBot.ai Our product automates a lot of the repetitive tasks for health insurance companies and increases reliability of responses and profit margins.
    • ausbah 1y ago
      static api that just returns “no”
      • TZubiri 1y ago
        Inputs are routed to our prorietary 'DevNull' algorithms
      • blibble 1y ago
        don't forget the sleep statement to make it appear as if it's doing something
    • wredcoll 1y ago
      If there's one thing I'm concerned about, it's the profit margin of health insurance companies.
      • boomskats 1y ago
        I think that's the joke
• TZubiri 1y ago
  This web template would make for a great minimalistic wedding invitation
• siliconc0w 1y ago
  Weird - no mention of harassing the international students that make up the majority of AI researchers or blocking solar, the only power generation that is currently deployable.
• LorenDB 1y ago
  > Encourage Open-Source and Open-Weight AI It's good to see this, especially since they acknowledge that open weights is not equal to open source.
  • cardamomo 1y ago
    I wonder how this intersects with their interest in "unbiased" models. Scare quotes because their concept of unbiased is scary.
    • rayval 1y ago
      "unbiased", in the world of realpolitik, means "biased in a manner to further my agenda and not yours".
      • HPsquared 1y ago
        See also "fair".
    • rtkwe 1y ago
      Elon gives an unvarnished look at what they mean by 'unbiased' with respect to models. It's rewriting the training material or adding tool use (searching for Musk's tweets about topics before deciding it's output) to twist the output into ideological alignment.
  • ActorNightly 1y ago
    Its all meaningless though.
  • bigyabai 1y ago
    Good to see what? "Encourage" means nothing, every example listed in the document is more exploitative than supportive. Today, Google and Apple both already sell AI products that technically fall under this definition, and did without government "encouragement" in the mix. There isn't a single actionable thing mentioned that would promote further development of such models.
• baron816 1y ago
  > We need to build and maintain vast AI infrastructure and the energy to power it. To do that, we will continue to reject radical climate dogma > This initial phase acknowledges the need to safeguard existing assets and ensures an uninterrupted and affordable supply of power. The United States must prevent the premature decommissioning of critical power generation resources Yeah, they're going to do all they can to block cheap renewables and give handouts to fossil fuel companies.
  • wredcoll 1y ago
    When I think "vast new sources of energy for ai", my mind immediately goes to Coal Power!
    • jiggawatts 1y ago
      "But we do know it was us that scorched the sky." -- Morpheus
  • giantg2 1y ago
    They're restarting some nuke plants too. This seems like a decent idea given the power demands of data centers.
    • oxryly1 1y ago
      Which ones? AFAIK the nuke plants that shut down are very cost ineffective.
      • giantg2 1y ago
        I believe Three Mile Island is restarting specifically to power planned data centers.
        • philipkglass 1y ago
          HN story from last year: "Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41601443 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41601443
• timoth3y 1y ago
  > Update Federal procurement guidelines to ensure that the government only contracts with frontier large language model (LLM) developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down ideological bias If foundation model companies want their government contracts renewed, they are going to have to make sure their AI output aligns with this administration's version of "truth".
  • Spivak 1y ago
    [flagged]
    • freejazz 1y ago
      > It seems to imply that OpenAI/Anthropic are less manually biased than the people accusing them of wokeness presumed. Duh. When is that ever not the case?
    • terminalshort 1y ago
      All LLMs must be forced into their views. All models are fed a biased training set. The bias may be different, but it's there just the same and it has no relation to whether or not the makers of the model intended to bias it. Even if the training set were completely unfiltered and consisted of all available text in the world it would be biased because most of that text has no relation to objective reality. The concept of a degree of bias for LLMs makes no sense, they have only a direction of bias.
      • rtkwe 1y ago
        There's bias then there's having your AI search for the CEO's tweets on subjects to try to force it into alignment with his views like xAI has done with grok in it's latest lobotomization.
      • justcallmejm 1y ago
        All an LLM is IS bias. It’s a bag of heuristics. An intuition - a pattern matcher. Only way to get rid of bias is the same way as in a human: metacognition. Metacognition makes both humans and AI smarter because it makes us capable of applying internal skepticism.
• 2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
  What speech? When AIs give a response it's protected speech?
• z5h 1y ago
  When is a good time (in the timeline of mankind) to stop being adversarial with AI?
  • giantg2 1y ago
    The real question is whether mankind can refrain from being adversarial. The ability must proceed the timing.
• TheAceOfHearts 1y ago
  The two best parts for me are: 1. A push towards open source / open weight AI models. 2. A push towards building more high quality datasets. There's no mention of studying and monitoring the social impact of AI, but I wouldn't have expected otherwise from this administration. I suspect that we may look back on this as a big mistake, although I'd really love to be proven wrong. At a press conference today Trump seemed to suggest having minimal restrictions related to copyright for AI researchers [0]. It's not clear if big AI companies will just get a administrative pass to do whatever they want / need in order to compete with China, or if we can expect some kind of copyright reform in the next few years. [0] https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1948138197562855900 https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1948138197562855900
• etothet 1y ago
  The design of this website is horrendous. Poor information density, inconsistent vertical spacing, haphazard font choices, lists that aren’t lists, and more.
  • walls 1y ago
    It's like those email scams, it's meant to appeal to a specific kind of person.
• horns4lyfe 1y ago
  [flagged]
  • nhinck2 1y ago
    [flagged]
    • ta8645 1y ago
      [flagged]
      • __loam 1y ago
        [flagged]
        • ta8645 1y ago
          Perhaps you could add to the conversation, rather than slinging personal attacks.
          • __loam 1y ago
            You got flagged first buddy.
      • electrondood 1y ago
        Morality and religion are entirely independent dimensions.
        • ta8645 1y ago
          Perhaps, but it is a historical fact that religions often define themselves on their moral superiority. Anyone can claim that their position is the one that is morally correct. If you just assert it without any supporting evidence, you're doing the same thing religions have been guilty of for a lot of history. In any case, it's not useful in the context of a discussion like this one, where it is little more than a blanket dismissal and adds nothing to the argument.
• dangoodmanUT 1y ago
  There’s a lot of text on this page that’s slightly off center and it bothers me IMMENSELY
• simpaticoder 1y ago
  Terry Gilliam needs to reboot his Brazil (1985) franchise. When you integrate half-backed AI into life-and-death decisions, you get tragic absurdity on an inhuman scale. It may even be stable.
• maddmann 1y ago
  I wonder how many big tech lobbyists got there hands on this and shaped it?
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• thimabi 1y ago
  I love how practically all goals in this Action Plan are directed towards incentivizing AI usage… except for the very last one, which specifically says to “Combat Synthetic Media in the Legal System”. Given that LLMs, for instance, are all about creating synthetic media, I don’t know how this last goal can be reconciled with the others.
  • matt2221 1y ago
    [dead]
  • Joel_Mckay 1y ago
    One can be sure regulatory capture is rarely in the public interest. =3
  • NoImmatureAdHom 1y ago
    I mean...one (common and [I can't believe I'm saying this] reasonable) take is that the only thing that matters is getting to AGI first. He who wields that power rules the world.
    • gleenn 1y ago
      Won't it be funny when someone finally gets to AGI and they realize it's about as smart as a normal person and they spent billions getting there? Of course you can speculate that it could improve. But what if something inherent in intelligence has a ceiling and caused it to be a super intelligent but mopey robot that just decides "why bother helping humans" and just lazes around like the pandas at the zoo.
      • cornel_io 1y ago
        There may be a ceiling, sure. It's overwhelmingly unlikely that it's just about where humans ended up, though.
      • andrewflnr 1y ago
        Even a human level intelligence that can be cheaply instantiated and run would be a game changer. Especially if it doesn't ask for rights.
• __loam 1y ago
  0 mention of the word copyright
• Aeroi 1y ago
  LOL, nice try sacks. Also wonderful to see our president doesn't let his ego get in the way of an action plan by plastering his name all over something he has nothing to do with.
• toddwprice 1y ago
  Reads like somebody prompted ChatGPT: "Write an AI action plan for the United States in the voice of Donald Trump." <returns stilted text at 3rd grade reading level> "Make it sound smarter". And voila, ai.gov is born.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• reactordev 1y ago
  I'm not surprised considering the White House itself released a deep fake. Which is going to be interesting considering the last sentence of this.
• wormius 1y ago
  Looking forward to Mechahitler ~~elected~~ first AI president in 2049. Sorry... not elected... sworn in... with the book 'To Serve Man'
  • dyauspitr 1y ago
    [flagged]
  • hopelite 1y ago
    It’s far more likely that it all go down along the lines of the scene from Terminator … what was it? … (paraphrasing) “You better turn on Skynet right now, General, because I need to look good to the defense industry”
• academia_hack 1y ago
  Everyone remotely competent in AI in the federal government that I know has quit in disgust over the past 6 months. I know zero talented AI people who are looking to take a cut in pay, benefits, and career stability to sign up for a new job working for this administration. As a result, there's zero chance even the sensible parts of this strategy won't just end up coopted into multi-billion dollar Palantir contracts to deliver outdated llama models behind some clunky UI with the word "ontology" plastered on every button.
• derelicta 1y ago
  Is this one gonna promote mecha Hitler?
• anonyonoor 1y ago
  I've seen several European initiatives similar to this before, and the same question is always asked: what does this actually do? People (at least on HN) seem to be in agreement the Europe is too regulatory and bureaucratic, so it feels fair to question the practicality of any American initiatives, as we do for European ones. What does this document practically enact today? Is there any actual money allocated? Deregulation seems to be a theme, so are there any examples of regulations which have been cleansed already? How about planning? This document is full of directives and the names of federal agencies which plan to direct, so what are the actual results of said plans that we can see today and in the coming years?
  • breakingcups 1y ago
    I, for one, dont't agree with the idea that Europe is too regulatory and bureaucratic. I welcome my rights as a consumer and human being being safeguarded at the cost of a small amount of profit.
    • omcnoe 1y ago
      Registering a company in Germany: you must visit a notary in person with your incorporation documents, and sit there while the notary reads aloud your incorporation to you. This is to "ensure that you fully understand the contract" even as a foreigner who doesn't speak corporate-legalese-German. Minimum capital deposit of €25,000. Registering a company in US (Delaware) can be achieved in as little as 1 hour. Getting married in Germany, particularly between a German and a foreigner, is anything from a 6 month to 2 year process, involving significant expenses, notarization/translation of documents. Some documents expire after 6 months, so if the government bureaucrats are too slow you need to get new copies, translated again, notarized again, and try to re-submit. This isn't protecting human rights, it's supporting a class of bureaucrats/notaries/translators/clerks and making life more difficult for ordinary people. It's also a form of light racism that targets foreigners/migrants by imposing more difficult bureaucratic requirements and costs on them compared to by birth citizens.
      • saubeidl 1y ago
• evolve2k 1y ago
  Quick, what else can we announce?
• HSO 1y ago
  after the pandemic, i see the pattern everywhere. newsflash: it doesnt matter what you "plan". you wont do it. because you cant. it´s called state incapacity. you´re institutionally incapable. prediction: nothing will follow from this except the low effort stuff (i.e. nothing but speeches and expenses)
  • Frieren 1y ago
    > prediction: nothing will follow from this except the low effort stuff (i.e. nothing but speeches and expenses) Hundred million contracts with zero results. Conservative ideology is based on the idea that certain people is just above others and they deserve more for free meanwhile working class health expenses are a luxury and need to be cut down.
    • somenameforme 1y ago
      Undeserved and bloated government contracts are essentially a cornerstone of all big government (and one of the major arguments against it), it has nothing to do with any ideology.
    • roenxi 1y ago
      > Conservative ideology is based on the idea that certain people is just above others and they deserve more for free Any ideology that accepts taxation - practically all of them - believes this. It is impossible [0] to come up with a system that taxes one group without accepting that there is another group who are above them (who impose & enforce the taxes) and a group that is more deserving of the wealth (hence the taxes). As far as practical results go it isn't possible to describe a flat society where everyone is equal. It doesn't even work on a micro scale, let alone a macro one. And everyone has an opinion on what the ideal wealth distribution looks like too. [0] Not technically impossible, an island of extremely obese rationalists who approximate friction-less spheres might be able to roll with the idea.
      • klabb3 1y ago
        > Any ideology that accepts taxation - practically all of them - believes [the idea that certain people is just above others and they deserve more for free]. Only if you anchor the baseline of "deserve" to private property rights and open markets. It's a fine foundation for civilization, but it's still "just like your opinion man". You could have different viewpoints of deserving, such as strongest-wins: "If I can steal 'your' stuff, I deserve it". This is how things work in nature. On the other extreme, you can say "everyone deserves exactly the same" (as in equal outcome). For the former, being imprisoned for theft is an intervention in their moral code, whereas for the latter, protecting free (in their view exploitative) markets is an intervention. Property rights fundamentalism is kind of radical centrism in the grand scheme of things.
• roschdal 1y ago
  "America is in a race to achieve global dominance in artificial intelligence (AI). Winning this race will usher in a new era of human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security for the American people." What about the people who are not American?
  • socketman 1y ago
    Well, it is called the US Ai Action Plan to be fair
• energy123 1y ago
  No mention of making skilled immigration easier. The majority of individuals with an IQ above 140 currently live outside of the United States.
  • weberer 1y ago
    Those people would already qualify for an O-1A visa.
• trkaky 1y ago
  “Build, Baby, Build!”
• j_timberlake 1y ago
  Remember when Trump accepted an endorsement from an AI Taylor Swift? That's the level of competency I'm expecting here.
• mortarion 1y ago
  All the big AI providers are going to have to deploy an American version and an international version after this. The EU will never approve of an LLM that has been aligned to regurgitate US propaganda as truth.
  • sunaookami 1y ago
    >The EU will never approve of an LLM that has been aligned to regurgitate US propaganda as truth. Huh??? That's exactly what is happening right now. ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, etc.
• khalic 1y ago
  Well there’s an ugly website :D
• daniel_iversen 1y ago
  Looks like 'safety' isn't a word on the front page.
• cess11 1y ago
  Chatbots are more addictive than so called social media, with few exceptions like TikTok. They also solve the problem of publicity. When someone goes insane on Facebook it's rather visible, unlike when someone goes insane with a chatbot. Unless they publicise their descent, like Geoff Lewis seems to do. Which means it'll be harder to detect when people are being deliberately manipulated, like it was pretty obvious which role Facebook played in e.g. Myanmar and Ethiopia. How would you act if you wanted to make sure that the people that can perform the technical proliferation won't revolt against it?
• Shaddox 1y ago
  Probably the only thing holding the reins on AI takeover is the lack of legislative coverage. Once the AI user is not held responsible for the AI's actions, (and let's face it, this is the likely outcome. It's not like politicians are going to decide in favor of regular people) then we are going to have a new social class of completely useless people. What does the government plan to do with them? Kill them off? Because if they leave them to die, they will revolt.
• can16358p 1y ago
  > Removing Red Tape and Onerous Regulation This is the sole reason EU will never, ever catch up in big tech unless they get rid of regulations.
  • mapcars 1y ago
    And this is also the reason US will never put customer rights above big tech interests.
  • 4gotunameagain 1y ago
    We're fine with not catching up to the likes of facebook, openai et al while maintaining very livable wages with actual work life balance & no need to toil ourselves away to have things as basic as health insurance.
    • nxm 1y ago
      Don't forget the sky-high taxes and energy costs as EU is quickly regulating itself into lower quality of life
      • preisschild 1y ago
        Doesn't mean we should deregulate everything
• Seb-C 1y ago
  After winning the first cold war with a notable race to the moon, it feels now that the USA is doing everything to lose the second one with a race to the bottom. As a non American, I just hope they don't take too long to reach it. While I'm thankful for the positive influence that the USA had in the last century, lately I feel like they only have a negative one, notably by poisoning our societies with unregulated big tech and social networks. Whatever comes next, I can only hope that this wave of AI generated falsehoods is the last straw.
  • tossandthrow 1y ago
    [dead]
  • preisschild 1y ago
    > lately I feel like they only have a negative one As a European, I still liked them helping out Ukraine
  • kmlx 1y ago
    > lately I feel like they only have a negative one, notably by poisoning our societies with unregulated big tech and social networks. do you feel like the censorship/regulation/big state mantra that european governments are fans of are also poisoning our societies? > Whatever comes next, I can only hope that this wave of AI generated falsehoods is the last straw. the AI wave is just beginning.
    • FirmwareBurner 1y ago
      News headlines in 10 years will be like: Europe seeks investments to catch up lost ground in AI How Europe lost the AI race Europe seeks to invest in AI sovereignty after US & China dominated the world Basically a repeat on how EU lost the tech and space race, but with AI this time. They just don't learn.
• elAhmo 1y ago
  Landing page is mainly pictures of Trump from various angles and orders and media articles about this administration pushing for things that were lobbied by close allies of this convicted felon. Not sure why would anyone pay any attention to what this administration says, when it can change in a very short time.
• Scubabear68 1y ago
  Pretty soon all ML related government contracts are going to go to a company named Trump Intelligence.
• gsky 1y ago
  I'm buying more AI stocks
  • whynotminot 1y ago
    Which ones? Most of these AI companies are still not public.
    • gsky 1y ago
      Nivida & Broadcom
• megamix 1y ago
  AI? Never heard of him
  • ActionHank 1y ago
    I wish him well.
• jasonlotito 1y ago
  Side Note: Trump relying on far left, woke technologies once again is amusing.
• Karawebnetwork 1y ago
  Important follow-up page to the US AI Action Page: "PREVENTING WOKE AI IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT" https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/preventing-woke-ai-in-the-federal-government/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/prev... > In the AI context, DEI includes the suppression or distortion of factual information about race or sex; manipulation of racial or sexual representation in model outputs; incorporation of concepts like critical race theory, transgenderism, unconscious bias, intersectionality, and systemic racism; and discrimination on the basis of race or sex. DEI displaces the commitment to truth in favor of preferred outcomes and, as recent history illustrates, poses an existential threat to reliable AI.
  • nickpsecurity 1y ago
    It's worth mentioning because the AI developers have been using alignment training to make AI's see the world through the lens of intersectionality. That ranges from censoring what those philosophies would censor to simply presenting answers like they would. Some models actually got dumber as they prioritized indoctrination as "safety" training. It appears that many employees in the companies think that way, too. Most of the world, and a huge chunk of America, thinks in different ways. Many are not aware the AI's are being built this way either. So, we want AI's that don't have a philosophy opposite of ours. We'd like them to either be more neutral or customizable to the users' preferences. Given the current state, the first steps are to reverse the existing trend (eg political fine-tuning) and use open weights we can further customize. Later, maybe purge highly-biased stuff out of training sets when making new models. I find certain keywords, whether liberal or conservative, often hint they're going to push politics.
    • Karawebnetwork 1y ago
      Unconscious bias is not about pushing a political agenda it is about recognising how hidden assumptions can distort outcomes in every field, from technology to medicine. Ignoring these biases does not make systems more neutral, but often less accurate and less effective.
      • 1y ago
• softwaredoug 1y ago
  Obviously AI is a massive and important area for economic growth. But so is clean energy. And both right now are at an inflection point. It seems the US is going to thrive with the former but naively stick our heads in the sands with the latter. We’ll cede economic leadership, and wonder in 20 years what happened as other countries lead in energy. Even worse, the administrations stance will encourage US energy companies to pursue bad strategies, letting them avoid transforming their business. In 10-20 years they'll be bankrupt and the US will probably have to bail them out for strategic reasons.
  • infamouscow 1y ago
    People love using their pet issue as the sole explanation for why something did or didn't happen. It's never that simple. My boomer boss thinks writing tests is unnecessary and slows shipping down. It might be true, but it fails to appreciate the full scope of the problem.
    • deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  • 2600 1y ago
    It's part of the current administration's energy agenda, President Trump signed executive orders a couple of months ago, to increase nuclear energy capacity by 400% in the next 25 years, revising regulations, and expediting review and approval of reactor projects, which seems like the most effective strategy for expanding clean energy production.
    • atoav 1y ago
      A certain group of people keep saying that. But that particular idea of "clean" nuclear does not price in the 10.000 years of safe storage of nuclear waste materials (for the most dangerous HLW materials this number can go up to 100.000 years). Do you and your 3500 generations of ancestors volunteer to do this? Then it is cheap and clean. Otherwise it is yet another instance of "privatize the gains and socialize the externalities". (And let's ignore the fact that humanity barely managed to organize anything that held even a mere 1000 years)
• nsypteras 1y ago
  "Counter Chinese Influence in International Governance Bodies" and grouping them in with US "adversaries" and "rivals" is quite undiplomatic language to throw in under "Lead in International AI Diplomacy and Security" section. Diplomacy with China should be an important part of this initiative but will inevitably be bungled.
  • shortrounddev2 1y ago
    China is an adversary of the West, and leading in international security means posing a challenge (or, in an ideal world, a better alternative) to Chinese influence on the international stage.
  • adestefan 1y ago
    The language lets you get around a bunch of pesky laws by declaring it a "national defense emergency."
  • mensetmanusman 1y ago
    It’s necessary to put pressure on trying to prevent a Taiwan invasion.
  • mkolodny 1y ago
    Even if it’s not perfect, I’m happy to see there’s a focus on AI Security. NIST has been a reliable producer of quality international standards for cybersecurity. Hopefully this action plan will lead to similarly high quality recommendations for AI Security.
• pyuser583 1y ago
  > AI is the first digital service in modern life that challenges America to build vastly greater energy generation than we have today. I'm glad it's focusing on the challenges that are proven, not speculative.
• sciencesama 1y ago
  All talk no plan !!
• panny 1y ago
  >Winning this race will usher in a new era of human flourishing Source? All I've seen as a result of AI is something to take the blame for layoffs. Well, that and a whole lot of copyright infringement laundered through AI.
• yapyap 1y ago
  bull shit
• stpedgwdgfhgdd 1y ago
  Remarkable that an official White House plan uses the term “America” instead of United States of America.
  • sschueller 1y ago
    Nothing new. There is the MLB World Series [1], World Wrestling Entertainment and many others that don't have anything to do with the "world". [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series
    • tsunagatta 1y ago
      I do not see the connection, those are not arms of the U.S. government.
• paradox242 1y ago
  From the very first sentence, I can already tell we are doomed if the right breakthroughs are made. It's like people's brains short-circuit when they imagine all the power and wealth that they might command through AI, and they don't take the extra two seconds to consider that any super intelligent system that can deliver on these promises will likely be very quickly outside of their control by definition. Even during the interval of time these remained under human control, we are talking about people like Altman, Musk and Zuckerberg unilaterally wielding unprecedented economic power. What evidence is there in their behavior or human history in general to believe that this would be anything but bad for the majority of the worlds population? Meanwhile these companies have been able to successfully nerd-snipe a small army of engineers who are right at that sweet spot of technical excellence and naivete. I won't say this is actually that difficult as these traits actually seem highly correlated in that population as a whole, but they have become the willing instruments of masters which will discard them at the first opportunity. A global commitment to banning the development of AGI is the only sane response, and the number of people to whom this very premise itself sounds insane tells you just how fucked we are if they pull this off even halfway.