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.”