&w=3840&q=100)
White House to launch plan to boost US AI globally, limit foreign curbs
Reuters WASHINGTON
The White House intends to publish a plan on Wednesday that calls for the export of American AI technology abroad and a crackdown on state laws deemed too restrictive to let it flourish, a document seen by Reuters shows.
According to a summary of the draft plan seen by Reuters, the White House will bar federal AI funding from going to states with tough AI rules and ask the Federal Communications Commission to assess whether state laws conflict with its mandate.
It will also promote open source and open weight AI development and "export American AI technologies through full-stack deployment packages" and data center initiatives led by the Commerce Department.
The plan will "focus on empowering American workers through AI-enabled job creation and industry breakthroughs," according to the document.
Janet Egan, a fellow at The Center for a New American Security, said the plan, as described by Reuters, represents a market shift in strategy from "a primarily restrictive approach to AI" under Biden to a focus on answering the question "how do you start spreading the infrastructure and the technology that will underpin the globe?"
Despite the focus on expansion, the plan does mention the importance of "defending against misuse and preparing for future AI-related risks," according to the summary.
US President Donald Trump ordered his administration in January to produce a plan that would make "America the world capital in artificial intelligence" and reduce regulatory barriers to its rapid expansion.
That report, which includes input from the National Security Council, is due by Wednesday. Trump is set to mark that deadline with a major speech as part of an event titled Winning the AI Race, organized by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks and his co-hosts on the All-In podcast.
"The Plan will deliver a strong, specific, and actionable federal policy roadmap that goes beyond the details reported here and we look forward to releasing it soon, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy spokeswoman Victoria LaCivita said in a statement.
Trump is laser-focused on removing barriers to AI expansion, a marked departure from his predecessor, Joe Biden, who feared US adversaries like China could harness AI to supercharge its military and harm allies.
Biden, who left office in January, imposed a raft of restrictions on exports of coveted American AI chips to China and other countries that could use or divert the semiconductors to China over national security concerns.
Trump rescinded Biden's executive order aimed at promoting competition, protecting consumers and ensuring AI was not used for misinformation. He also pulled back Biden's so-called AI diffusion rule, which capped the amount of American AI computing capacity that some countries were allowed to obtain via US AI chip imports.
Last month, Sacks downplayed the risk that coveted American AI chips could be smuggled to bad actors and expressed concern that regulating US AI too tightly could stifle growth and cede the critical market to China.
Under Trump's plan, the White House would also promote AI use at the Pentagon, launch a program to identify federal regulations that impede AI development and streamline the permitting process for data center construction.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
20 minutes ago
- NDTV
Humans Outshine Google And OpenAI AI At Prestigious Math Olympiad Despite Record Scores
At the International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO) held this month in Queensland, Australia, human participants triumphed over cutting-edge artificial intelligence models developed by Google and OpenAI. For the first time, these AI models achieved gold-level scores in the prestigious competition. Google announced on Monday that its advanced Gemini chatbot successfully solved five out of six challenging problems. However, neither Google's Gemini nor OpenAI's AI reached a perfect score. In contrast, five talented young mathematicians under the age of 20 achieved full marks, outperforming the AI models. The IMO, regarded as the world's toughest mathematics competition for students, showcased that human intuition and problem-solving skills still hold an edge over AI in complex reasoning tasks. This result highlights that while generative AI is advancing rapidly, it has yet to surpass the brightest human minds in all areas of intellectual competition. "We can confirm that Google DeepMind has reached the much-desired milestone, earning 35 out of a possible 42 points a gold medal score," the US tech giant cited IMO president Gregor Dolinar as saying. "Their solutions were astonishing in many respects. IMO graders found them to be clear, precise and most of them easy to follow." Around 10 percent of human contestants won gold-level medals, and five received perfect scores of 42 points. US ChatGPT maker OpenAI said that its experimental reasoning model had scored a gold-level 35 points on the test. The result "achieved a longstanding grand challenge in AI" at "the world's most prestigious math competition", OpenAI researcher Alexander Wei wrote on social media. "We evaluated our models on the 2025 IMO problems under the same rules as human contestants," he said. "For each problem, three former IMO medalists independently graded the model's submitted proof." Google achieved a silver-medal score at last year's IMO in the British city of Bath, solving four of the six problems. That took two to three days of computation -- far longer than this year, when its Gemini model solved the problems within the 4.5-hour time limit, it said. The IMO said tech companies had "privately tested closed-source AI models on this year's problems", the same ones faced by 641 competing students from 112 countries. "It is very exciting to see progress in the mathematical capabilities of AI models," said IMO president Dolinar. Contest organisers could not verify how much computing power had been used by the AI models or whether there had been human involvement, he cautioned.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
20 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump plans to rescind scientific finding that allows US fund fight against climate change threats: Report
The Trump administration is preparing to eliminate the legal and scientific cornerstone of the federal government's climate change policy. A draft Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposal, not yet public, would rescind the 2009 'endangerment finding' that identified greenhouse gas emissions as a threat to human health and welfare. Legal foundation of climate policy targeted As reported by The New York Times, two individuals familiar with the draft explained that the EPA intends to roll back the finding without directly challenging the scientific consensus that emissions from fossil fuels contribute to global warming. Instead, the administration reportedly plans to argue that the EPA exceeded its legal authority when it issued a sweeping declaration under the Clean Air Act. The endangerment finding, developed during the Obama administration in response to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, provided the legal basis for federal rules limiting emissions from vehicles, power plants and industrial sources. If repealed, the decision would not only nullify existing environmental protections but also prevent future administrations from reinstating similar measures without starting over legally and scientifically. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Tailpipe emission rules also in crosshairs The draft rule also includes a proposal to revoke federal limits on vehicle emissions that were designed to speed up the transition to electric cars. The transportation sector is currently the largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in the US. The EPA is expected to argue that such regulations, based on the endangerment finding, cause harm to consumers by limiting vehicle choice and increasing prices rather than improving public health. Reports described the EPA's framing as an economic one—suggesting that federal efforts to reduce carbon emissions come at too great a financial cost. Administrator Lee Zeldin, in earlier remarks reported by The Washington Post, emphasised the need to balance environmental goals with energy security and economic freedom, framing the review of the endangerment finding as part of the administration's broader deregulatory agenda. Environmental and legal experts cited by both newspapers have expressed deep concern over the proposed rollback. The New York Times noted that critics see this move as a direct challenge to the Supreme Court's Massachusetts vs EPA decision, which concluded that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Legal analysts told The Washington Post that any attempt to withdraw the endangerment finding could unravel the EPA's authority to act on climate altogether. Some believe the rule is unlikely to survive in court but warn that even temporary setbacks could paralyse climate action. Political motives? Behind the scenes, the proposal appears to have been shaped by former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, according to The Washington Post. Clark, who was involved in legal opposition to greenhouse gas regulations during the Bush administration, is believed to be a principal architect of the repeal. His past criticisms of the endangerment finding, especially its alleged failure to weigh economic consequences, have reportedly informed the draft rule's legal strategy. Instead of contesting climate science outright, the rule reportedly focusses on legal technicalities—arguing that the EPA's authority should be limited to addressing specific pollutants in narrowly defined contexts. This approach is designed to bypass the robust scientific basis of the original finding while aiming to avoid direct confrontation with the broader consensus on climate change. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A coordinated deregulatory effort The attempt to repeal the endangerment finding is one of many efforts by the Trump administration to reverse environmental protections. As The New York Times reported, the administration has already rolled back rules targeting emissions from fossil fuels, discouraged electric vehicle development and withdrawn the US from international climate commitments. David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defence Council, speaking to The Washington Post, was one of several legal experts who characterised the move as a strategy to weaken the Clean Air Act by denying the well-documented risks of climate pollution. Others noted that this rule could become the centrepiece of the administration's climate legacy—one that seeks to neutralise not just current regulations, but future ones as well. While the draft rule has not yet been formally released, the EPA was submitted to the White House for review on June 30. Once published, it will undergo a period of public comment, and potentially litigation, before becoming final. The outcome of this regulatory shift could have lasting consequences not only for current efforts to reduce emissions but also for America's long-term ability to respond to the growing climate crisis.
The Wire
24 minutes ago
- The Wire
The Gujarat Model: At a Dangerous Crossing
'He is incorruptible'; the middle-aged founder of a well-known chartered accountancy firm in Mumbai looked palpably thrilled. It was another of Mumbai's social get togethers following a business conference where India's supposedly best minds exchanged political gossip and fulminated on the state of the nation, including its celebrated potholes. 'He is ushering in changes. He looks like a man on a mission.', the exuberant gentleman continued, like a rollercoaster on steroids. I saw a Narendra Modi 'bhakt' long before that dodgy sobriquet became a national meme. The year was 2004. The Gujarat chief minister had already assiduously created a political narrative about himself, even as an ageing PM Atal Behari Vajpayee was selling the chimera of India Shining. But I am not easy pickings; we are not an argumentative nation for nothing. 'These things don't matter. They happen all the time' 'Do you endorse what happened in Gujarat in 2002? Is that okay? Does that not alone disqualify Modi from holding such an august office?'. The gentleman was unperturbed. If at all, he seemed stunned at my apparent naivete. He looked at me with a bemused expression of a laboratory scientist who was about to do a surgery on a trapped cockroach: "These things don't matter. They happen all the time'. Whataboutery would go on to become India's favorite sport on prime-time TV to rationalise the worst of shenanigans, corruption, violence, sectarianism and riots. Fast forward to 2014: Modi was the presumptive prime ministerial candidate of the BJP. He had graduated from being a regional satrap ( as TV anchors brand ambitious provincial leaders) into a national alternative. By that time, I had morphed from being a part-time, quasi-back-office analyst for the Congress to becoming its ubiquitous face on television networks. Modi willy-nilly would become the surname I encountered at every nook and corner. And on every show. 'Mr Jha, Modi stands for development', the popular bespectacled face who had mesmerised the nation with his trademark theatrics, was implacable. 'India needs his Gujarat model'. He sounded like the saffron party's campaigner-in-chief himself. ' Seriously? ', I pushed back. 'Are we saying that we have become a $ 2 trillion economy without development? Are you aware that India has grown at nearly 7.8% average GDP during 2004-14 and lifted over 140 million people out of poverty ? Yes, there are problems, but we are the global sweet spot after China. So what new 'development' are we talking about?'. It was my early discovery that facts, data, statistics and evidence mattered little in the noisy public discourse. Modi's Acche Din ( Happy days) was a precursor to what would be Donald Trump's astonishingly successful Make America Great Again ( MAGA) shibboleth that would transmogrify into a movement, a neo-Republican vote bloc. On every parameter, America was the dominant superpower in 2016, but Trump had altered the political conversation. Both Modi and Trump would go on to annihilate their beleaguered and stunned opponents. On July 11, 2025 , a bridge in Vadodara district of Gujarat collapsed. It killed 20 innocent people for no fault of theirs. Barring a tiny fleeting mention, the news cycle cursorily buried it. They cannot be blamed. When the Morbi bridge fell in October 2022, its death toll of 135 people did not affect the electorate whatsoever. The BJP returned to power in the assembly elections that were held just a few months later with a massive mandate. In Uttar Pradesh's Lakhimpur-Kheri, the son of the local Member of Parliament was arrested for driving his jeep mercilessly into protesting farmers in October 2021. In the assembly elections just five months later, the BJP won all 8 assembly seats in the Lok Sabha constituency with handsome margins. I was reminded of my unforgettable confabulation with the suited-booted corporate schmoozer in 2004: 'These things don't matter. They happen all the time'. But do they? And just because they happened in the past, true or exaggerated, must we silently condone the brazen dismantling of what was once a democratic and secular role model to the world? We were once a newly independent country that had boldly resurrected itself from a pulverised economy and a harrowing bloody partition, to embrace religious diversity and inclusive growth, and become a lighthouse to new societies battling seemingly irreconcilable contradictions. Societies pay a huge price for not just bad choices but even for temporary blind-sidedness. The Congress's underwhelming defense of itself led to an unprecedented wave of support for Modi, enough for its people to shockingly ignore the deadly pogrom of 2002, fake encounter killings, rise of crony capitalism, the ruthless decimation of dissenting voices, the unrelenting intimidation of brutalised minorities. A manufactured cult A cult was born, or more appropriately, manufactured. The Gujarat model is now trumpeted as Modi's India by his acolytes. In his model, all you do is build highways, expressways, metro lines, trains, ports and highways. And even have an eponymous cricket stadium. In her Pulitzer Prize winning book Autocracy Inc, author Anne Applebaum talks of disinformation, surveillance and propaganda as the trifecta of modern-day autocracies, democratically elected leaders who surreptitiously through regulatory and media capture change the destinies of nations. As I write, the Supreme Court calling out India's police state (Why are you fighting political battles, ED?) , and the alleged attempt by the Election Commission to disenfranchise voters in Bihar are a warning; Politicians may love power, but despots will never give it up. Even as Modi continues to boast about his infrastructure push, he has not yet understood the core principle of political leadership; societies need a bridge between communities before they pay their toll-tax for a shimmering patch of concrete. And tragically for Modi, even they are crumbling. And broken. Sanjay Jha is an author and former national spokesperson for the Congress. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
