Microsoft, OpenAI to urge senators to speed power supply permitting, boost government data access
and other
AI leaders
on Thursday will urge US lawmakers to streamline federal permitting for artificial intelligence energy needs and open more government data sets for
AI training
, according to written testimony reviewed by Reuters.
"America's advanced economy relies on 50-year-old infrastructure that cannot meet the increasing electricity demands driven by AI, reshoring of manufacturing, and increased electrification," Microsoft President Brad Smith's written testimony says for a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on "Winning the AI Race".
OpenAI
CEO
Sam Altman
will tell senators that as AI systems improve people will want to use them more, and meeting that demand will require more chips, training data, energy and supercomputers. "We want to build a brain for the world and make it super easy for people to use it, with common-sense restrictions to prevent harm," Altman's testimony says.
CoreWeave
CEO Michael Intrator's written testimony highlights the energy-intensity of AI computation, citing an Energy Department estimate that data centers' consumption could rise to 12% of US electricity by 2028 from 4.4% in 2023.
"Millions of hours of training, billions of inference queries, trillions of model parameters, and continuous dynamic scaling are all driving an insatiable hunger for compute and energy that borders on exponential," he said.
He called for efforts "to streamline the permitting process to enable the addition of new sources of generation and the transmission infrastructure to deliver it."
AMD CEO
Lisa Su will tell senators leading in AI requires "rapidly building data centers at scale and powering them with reliable, affordable, and clean energy sources."
She added "moving faster also means moving AI beyond the cloud. To ensure every American benefits, AI must be built into the devices we use every day and made as accessible and dependable as electricity."
Smith called for opening US government data sets for AI training, citing actions by China and the United Kingdom.
"The federal government remains one of the largest untapped sources of high-quality and high-volume data," Smith said. "By making government data readily available for AI training, the United States can significantly accelerate the advancement of AI capabilities."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
12 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘MS Dhoni, Virat Kohli earn INR 100 crore per year through ads. Sachin Tendulkar in prime…': Ravi Shastri's revelation
Former India head coach Ravi Shastri stunned listeners on the 'Stick to Cricket' podcast—hosted by former England cricketers Michael Vaughan, Alastair Cook, Phil Tufnell, and David Lloyd—when asked about the earnings of top Indian cricketers. Virat Kohli and MS Dhoni are among the highest earning Indian cricketers(REUTERS) According to Shastri, icons such as MS Dhoni, Virat Kohli, and Sachin Tendulkar in their prime easily earned over ₹100 crore per year (~£10 million), primarily through brand endorsements. When Vaughan asked for a conversion, Shastri clarified: "They earn a lot. They earn a lot through endorsements, for sure. You know, and upwards of a hundred crores, I would say ten million. You just calculate," Shastri said. Shastri elaborated that these stars could manage anywhere between 15–20 advertisements in a single day during their peak, though packed cricket schedules often limited such opportunities . The former England captains' reaction was immediate and visceral—multiple exclamations of 'Wow!' reverberated in the studio, capturing the enormity of his disclosure. "Someone like an MS Dhoni or a Virat Kohli or a Sachin Tendulkar in his pomp, they would do over 15-20 ads. And it's per day. There's no time. They could easily do more because of the amount of cricket being played. So, you know, they'll do an ad for a year and give it to us and give a day," Shastri added. Shastri placed his revelations within the larger transformation of cricket's commercial landscape in India, which accelerated in two phases -- first after the 1983 World Cup victory and then the rise of the IPL, leading to booming revenues from TV rights, sponsorships, and advertising deals. He also remarked on the immense pressure that comes with such financial and public scrutiny—a life of 'no privacy' and short public memory for failures. The figures highlight how Indian cricket transcends sport to become a commercial juggernaut, rivalling global athletes like Messi or Ronaldo in earnings potential. While central contracts and match fees offer financial stability, the bulk of top players' wealth comes from endorsements. Despite high demand, players could engage in only a few ad shoots a year—due to packed international and domestic calendars.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
42 minutes ago
- First Post
Cambodia seeks immediate ceasefire with Thailand after deadly border clashes
Cambodia's ambassador to the UN, Chhea Keo, has said that the country has sought an 'unconditional' ceasefire with Thailand, adding that Phnom Penh also wanted a 'peaceful solution to the dispute' read more A Cambodian military personnel stands on a BM-21 Grad multiple rocket launcher, around 40 km from the disputed Ta Moan Thom temple, after Thailand and Cambodia exchanged heavy artillery on Friday as their worst fighting in more than a decade stretched for a second day, in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia, July 25, 2025. Reuters Cambodia on Saturday called for an immediate ceasefire with Thailand, two days after deadly border clashes rocked the two South East Asian neighbours, killing at least 14 Thai people. Cambodia's ambassador to the UN, Chhea Keo, has said that the country has sought an 'unconditional' ceasefire with Thailand, adding that Phnom Penh also wanted a 'peaceful solution to the dispute'. Thailand is yet to respond to Cambodia's ceasefire proposal publicly. Earlier on Friday, the country declared martial law in eight districts bordering Cambodia. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD However, Thailand's foreign minister told Reuters that there is no need for third-party mediation for both countries to end their hostilities, as world leaders called for a ceasefire. 138,000 people evacuated in Thailand More than 138,000 people have been evacuated from Thailand's border regions, its health ministry said, reporting 15 fatalities – 14 civilians and a soldier – with a further 46 wounded, including 15 troops. Fighting resumed in three areas around 4 am on Friday (2100 GMT Thursday), the Thai army said, with Cambodian forces firing heavy weapons, field artillery, and BM-21 rocket systems, and Thai troops responding 'with appropriate supporting fire.' Thailand launched an airstrike against Cambodia following weeks of squabbling along the border, which culminated in an exchange of fire from both sides. The two sides have blamed each other for increasing hostilities along the border, with Thailand accusing Cambodia of its 'inhumane, brutal and war-hungry' and Phnom Penh slamming Bangkok over 'unprovoked military aggression'. Border dispute reaches UN At the UN, Cambodia's envoy questioned Thailand's assertion that his country, which is smaller and less militarily developed than its neighbour, had initiated the conflict. '(The Security Council) called for both parties to (show) maximum restraint and resort to a diplomatic solution. That is what we are calling for as well,' said Chhea Keo. None of the other attendees of the UNSC meeting spoke to reporters. Meanwhile, Thailand has shut its borders with Cambodia, with the country's acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai saying that fighting now included heavy weapons and had spread to 12 locations. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD With inputs from agencies
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
Third US Court Halts Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order
A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from ending birthright citizenship for the children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally, issuing the third court ruling blocking the birthright order nationwide since a key Supreme Court decision in June. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, joining another district court as well as an appellate panel of judges, found that a nationwide injunction granted to more than a dozen states remains in force under an exception to the Supreme Court ruling. That decision restricted the power of lower-court judges to issue nationwide injunctions. The states have argued Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for health insurance services that are contingent on citizenship status. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement the administration looked forward to "being vindicated on appeal." New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, who helped lead the lawsuit before Sorokin, said in a statement he was "thrilled the district court again barred President Trump's flagrantly unconstitutional birthright citizenship order from taking effect anywhere." "American-born babies are American, just as they have been at every other time in our Nation's history," he added. "The President cannot change that legal rule with the stroke of a pen." Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, saying it should be "tailored to the States' purported financial injuries." Sorokin said a patchwork approach to the birthright order would not protect the states in part because a substantial number of people move between states. He also blasted the Trump administration, saying it had failed to explain how a narrower injunction would work. "That is, they have never addressed what renders a proposal feasible or workable, how the defendant agencies might implement it without imposing material administrative or financial burdens on the plaintiffs, or how it squares with other relevant federal statutes," the judge wrote. "In fact, they have characterized such questions as irrelevant to the task the Court is now undertaking. The defendants' position in this regard defies both law and logic." Sorokin acknowledged his order would not be the last word on birthright citizenship. Trump and his administration "are entitled to pursue their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and no doubt the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the question," Sorokin wrote. "But in the meantime, for purposes of this lawsuit at this juncture, the Executive Order is unconstitutional." The administration has not yet appealed any of the recent court rulings. Trump's efforts to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily will remain blocked unless and until the Supreme Court says otherwise. A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling earlier this month prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed, his order went into effect. On Wednesday, a San Francisco-based appeals court found the president's executive order unconstitutional and affirmed a lower court's nationwide block. A Maryland-based judge said last week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional. Plaintiffs in the Boston case earlier argued that the principle of birthright citizenship is "enshrined in the Constitution," and that Trump does not have the authority to issue the order, which they called a "flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands of American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage." They also argue that Trump's order halting automatic citizenship for babies born to people in the U.S. illegally or temporarily would cost states funding they rely on to "provide essential services" — from foster care to health care for low-income children, to "early interventions for infants, toddlers, and students with disabilities." At the heart of the lawsuits is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision. That decision found that Scott, an enslaved man, wasn't a citizen despite having lived in a state where slavery was outlawed. The Trump administration has asserted that children of noncitizens are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States and therefore not entitled to citizenship. "These courts are misinterpreting the purpose and the text of the 14th Amendment," Jackson, the White House spokeswoman, said in her statement.
