David Sacks: “FDA for AI” is fake news, but here’s why it’s making headlines @Jason: “ Who's leading Trump down the path of regulation and creating this AI FDA?” @DavidSacks: “I think there's several things going on here. The first one is, there's a lot of fake news. This whole idea of an FDA for AI, I don't think any senior official supports it. Certainly, I don't think that's the way the president thinks about these issues. He's the most pro-innovation president we've ever had. And the White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, just put out a statement last night that I think pretty much shoots this down. Second, there's another thing going on, which is a straw manning of what the Trump administration did on AI in its first year. In the same way that they want to spin this FDA for AI, they're also trying to spin what we did as this completely laissez-faire attitude, where there'd be no regulations whatsoever, nor guardrails. It's a way of criticizing what we did. They're trying to portray it as unsafe. In fact, if you look, on March 20th, the White House released a national AI regulatory framework in which we put out a four-page bulleted list of legislation that we would support. So we have not been against every conceivable regulation or every conceivable law, we just believe that there should be specific solutions to specific problems, as opposed to a giant power grab by Washington that would squash innovation. Point number three is, there is a legitimate thing happening here with, let's call it Mythos or cyber. Within 3-6 months, all the major frontier labs, including Chinese models, will have cyber capabilities. In response to that, we do need there to be a hardening of systems, and we do need there to be a scanning of codebases to find these vulnerabilities and patch them before the hackers do it. Because the hackers will have these capabilities in a matter of months. That's a certainty. So we do need a response to that. Now, my view on what should that response be, first of all, we should want the government and the private sector to work cooperatively, and I think they are. What we should be doing, I think, is getting these tools, Mythos, and then the OpenAI model, and others like it, in the hands of our cybersecurity industry. And by the way, not just the public companies like Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike, although certainly they're two of the most noteworthy, but there's also some incredibly strong startups on the way up. We need to get these tools into their hands as quickly as possible because they're a force multiplier for all the companies out there that aren't that good at cybersecurity, they can use these companies as vendors. And just one last point on this whole thing is, both Anthropic and OpenAI acted responsibly here. No one was trying to release these super powerful models. So in a way, all the people who are saying that we need pre-release approvals for models, they're trying to solve a problem that didn't exist. Yes, we do have this cyber issue, but that is a problem that we will solve over the next six months. What they're trying to do is use that issue to try and create a permanent new infrastructure in Washington. The classic 'never let a crisis go to waste' strategy.”

For the past year, I have worked diligently to get the Clarity Act passed, fulfilling President Trump’s vision to make the U.S. the crypto capital of the world. Last week, it was reported that I was set to leave for mandatory training as part of my service in the Georgia Army National Guard, right before Clarity hits the Senate floor. While I remain committed to fulfilling my service obligation, I am grateful to report that my training has been deferred, and that I will be able to see this effort through to the end. Thanks to @POTUS and @DavidSacks for the opportunity to continue this important work and to everyone who reached out last week. Let’s finish the job. 🇺🇸

THIS IS THE BEST EXPLANATION OF HOW AI IS ACTUALLY IMPACTING SOFTWARE. FROM AI CZAR DAVID SACKS: “YOU’RE NOT GOING TO REPLACE A MISSION-CRITICAL PLATFORM LIKE SALESFORCE WITH CODE GENERATED BY AN AI ASSISTANT THAT HASN’T BEEN THOROUGHLY TESTED. SALESFORCE HAS DECADES OF BUG FIXES, ENTERPRISE TESTING, AND REAL-WORLD VALIDATION BEHIND IT. THE IDEA THAT COMPANIES WILL RIP THAT OUT AND REPLACE IT WITH AI-GENERATED CODE OVERNIGHT JUST DOESN’T SEEM REALISTIC.”

The Trump administration should not “let China drive a wedge between Washington and Taipei,” write @RichardHaass and @DavidMSacks1. It is not too late to “undo the damage from Trump’s comments on Taiwan and his decision to pause arms sales.”

“ Unless something about their current trajectory changes, Anthropic will be the most powerful monopoly ever created in human history.” - David Sacks asks if Anthropic is just Standard Oil with better PR? “We know that tech markets have a history of consolidating down and turning into either monopolies or duopolies. And if you just look at the revenue right now, there's only two companies making substantial revenue on AI. It's Anthropic and OpenAI. Anthropic is growing at an exponential 10X a year, and if they just do that for 18 more months, they'll be by far the most valuable company in human history, and they'll have unprecedented control over the most important technology of our time. So I don't know what you call that, but it is something to think about. And I guess I do have a thought experiment for you guys, which is, I just want you to think for a second about the case of John D. Rockefeller, who I think is known as probably the most successful, most ruthless monopolist in American history. But he wasn't very good at PR. He was terrible at PR. Everyone sort of recognized how ruthless he is. We've seen movies like There Will Be Blood, which is basically about him. In any event, imagine if John D. Rockefeller was way better at public relations, and instead of calling his company Standard Oil, he called it Safe Oil. Because, as we know, kerosene is dangerous. Their first big product was kerosene. And kerosene can light your house or it can burn it down. And in the wrong hands it can torch a city, or you can use it to make a bomb. So John D., let's say, should have called for the creation of a new government agency to regulate the safety of his product. And they could have done rigorous testing, licensing, common sense regulation. There would've been a very intense debate over safety standards. You know, what should the proper wick thickness be? And should we allow all those dangerous independent refiners, right? And I think people would have gotten so wrapped up in this debate over what constituted safe oil or safe kerosene that they would have missed what was really going on, which is that Rockefeller was building the richest, most powerful monopoly of all time. In fact, people might even have called Rockefeller an effective altruist, because of course, he was so concerned about the safety of his product.”

"Elon Musk still works incredibly hard. I visited him recently, I left around midnight and he was still working. I think he must have gone till 2am. So I don't know anybody who works as hard as him. He's really in the technical details of it." 一 David Sacks