Department previously led by Elon Musk may be using AI to create ‘delete list', here's why
Department of Government Efficiency
" (DOGE), which was previously led by Tesla CEO
Elon Musk
, is reportedly using artificial intelligence (AI) to create a "delete list" of
federal regulations
. This initiative aims to cut 50% of regulations by the first anniversary of US President Donald Trump's second inauguration. According to internal documents obtained by The Washington Post, the "
Doge AI Deregulation Decision Tool
" will analysee 200,000 government regulations and will then select those deemed no longer required by law. Doge, which was overseen by Musk until May, claims that 100,000 of these regulations can be eliminated after incorporating staff feedback.
How DOGE is planning to reduce federal regulations using its AI tool
In a PowerPoint presentation shared by the Washington Post, the
Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) reportedly used the AI tool to make
'decisions on 1,083 regulatory sections,'
while the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
relied on it to write
'100% of deregulations.'
The Post report also included interviews of three HUD employees who said AI had been
'recently used to review hundreds, if not more than 1,000, lines of regulations.'
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Bogota: Unsold Furniture Liquidation 2024 (Prices May Surprise You)
Unsold Furniture | Search Ads
Learn More
Undo
During his 2024 campaign, Trump said that government regulations were 'driving up the cost of goods' and promised to pursue the 'most aggressive regulatory reduction' ever. He frequently opposed policies targeting the climate crisis and has even instructed the heads of all government agencies to conduct a comprehensive review of regulations in co-ordination with DOGE.
What the White House said about DOGE's AI tool deleting federal regulations
When asked about the use of AI in deregulation, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said to Washington Pos that
'all options are being explored'
to fulfill Trump's deregulation promises.
He added that
'no single plan has been approved or green-lit'
and emphasised that the work is
'in its early stages and is being conducted in a creative way in consultation with the White House'.
'The Doge experts creating these plans are the best and brightest in the business and are embarking on a never-before-attempted transformation of government systems and operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness,'
Fields noted.
Boat Aavante Prime 5.1 5000DA soundbar review: DOLBY ATMOS POWER!
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
23 minutes ago
- Hans India
Microsoft, OpenAI Seek Decade-Long Alliance to Secure Future of AI Access Amid AGI Uncertainty
Microsoft and OpenAI are once again revisiting their partnership, exploring a new decade-long agreement that could redefine how both companies collaborate well into the future. As artificial intelligence technologies rapidly advance, particularly with the looming possibility of achieving artificial general intelligence (AGI), both firms are pushing to lock in long-term assurances that suit their evolving ambitions. According to Bloomberg, the renewed discussions are centered on updating the terms of the current agreement, which could see Microsoft retain continued access to OpenAI's most powerful technologies—even if OpenAI eventually claims to have achieved AGI. This clause is crucial for Microsoft, given that its flagship AI-driven products, including Copilot for Word, Excel, and GitHub, are deeply integrated with OpenAI's GPT models. Under the present deal, Microsoft's rights to OpenAI's most advanced systems would diminish once AGI is officially declared. That's a major risk for the tech giant, whose generative AI efforts rely heavily on the consistent availability of those models. With OpenAI now nearing what it sees as AGI milestones, Microsoft is eager to renegotiate before reaching that tipping point. Meanwhile, OpenAI is looking to become a public-benefit corporation—a status that prioritizes public good alongside profit. However, to make that structural transition, the AI lab reportedly needs Microsoft's approval. In exchange for supporting the shift, Microsoft is said to be negotiating for greater equity in the restructured entity and an extension of its current AI access rights, which would otherwise expire in 2030 or earlier if AGI is declared. The heart of the debate lies in defining AGI itself—a feat that remains elusive and conceptually vague. What qualifies as AGI? A chatbot composing original symphonies? Explaining complex movie plots like Inception? Without a universally accepted benchmark, the AGI clause becomes a gray area, prompting months of back-and-forth between the two partners. Adding complexity to the negotiations, OpenAI has reportedly suggested to investors that Microsoft's share of its revenue will shrink over time. That prospect may not sit well with Microsoft, which has invested billions into OpenAI's success and relies on its models to power the Azure OpenAI Service. The partnership has faced strains before. In June, The Information revealed previous clashes over the AGI clause. More recently, OpenAI's move to diversify its cloud support—tapping into providers like Google, Oracle, and CoreWeave—has sparked further scrutiny about the long-term alignment between the two tech titans. Complicating matters even more is Elon Musk's ongoing lawsuit against OpenAI. Musk, a cofounder of the organization, has accused it of straying from its founding nonprofit ideals and becoming too aligned with Microsoft's commercial interests. For Microsoft, the timing of these negotiations is critical. With its quarterly earnings just around the corner, stakeholders will likely demand clarity on the future of its AI alliance with OpenAI—an alliance that could define the next chapter of the AI revolution.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
23 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump says US, Israel to run more Gaza food centres, offers few details
President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US will partner with Israel to run new food centres in Gaza to address the worsening humanitarian crisis there, but he and US officials offered few additional details about the plan or how it would differ from existing food distribution centres. Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One as he returned from a trip to Scotland that Israel would preside over the new food centres to make sure the distribution is proper. We're going to be dealing with Israel, and we think they can do a good job of it," Trump said. The opaque details come as the Trump administration is facing calls at home and abroad to do more to address the hunger crisis in Gaza. The U.S.'s close ally, Israel, is at the center of an international outcry as more images of emaciated children continue to emerge. That pressure comes after the U.S. pulled out of talks last week to try to broker a ceasefire in the 21-month Israel-Hamas war, accusing Hamas of acting in bad faith. But Trump this week broke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, disagreeing publicly with him about starvation in Gaza and citing the pictures of hungry people. The White House described it as a new aid plan to help people in Gaza obtain access to food and promised that details would emerge. It did not elaborate. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said Tuesday that she didn't know "the framework of how the new aid distribution would work. I'm waiting for the president to return. I don't want to get ahead of him, Bruce said. Democrats in Congress have implored the Trump administration to step up its role in addressing the suffering and starvation in Gaza. More than 40 senators signed a letter Tuesday urging the Trump administration to resume ceasefire talks and sharply criticizing the Israeli-backed American organization that had already been created to distribute food aid. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, questioned why the U.S. was not allowing long-standing aid groups to run food centers. I'm glad that the president is saying that this is a problem. But if we want to solve the problem, turn to the folks who have been doing this for decades," Kaine said. The few details Trump provided about the new food centers appeared similar to a program that was already rolled out in May, after Israel had blocked all food, medicine and other imports for 2 months. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, an Israeli-backed American contractor, opened four food distribution sites that month. Israel and GHF said that system was needed to prevent Hamas from siphoning off aid. The United Nations, which has been distributing food in Gaza throughout the war when allowed, denies any significant diversion of aid by Hamas. Hundreds of Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces while heading to the GHF sites, according to witnesses, health officials and the U.N. human rights office. Israel says its forces have only fired warning shots at people who approach its forces, and GHF says its armed contractors have only used pepper spray and fired occasional shots in the air to prevent dangerous crowding. The aid sites are in Israeli military zones, which is off limits to independent media. The U.N. refuses to cooperate with GHF, saying its model violates humanitarian principles by forcing Palestinians to travel long distances and risk their lives for food and because it allows Israel to control aid and use it to further mass displacement. Trump said Tuesday that he last spoke to Netanyahu two days earlier and that the Israeli leader wants to distribute food in a proper manner. I think Israel wants to do it, Trump said. And they'll be good at doing it. The president, for the second day in a row, remarked on the images of starving people and kids in Gaza, which seemed to prompt him this week to announce the new plan and his break with Netanyahu. Trump said Tuesday that everyone who saw the images coming out of Gaza would declare it terrible unless they're pretty cold-hearted or, worse than that, nuts. Those are kids that are starving. They are starving, Trump said. They've got to get them food. And we're going to get them food. The shift brings Trump closer to some in his MAGA base, who have rejected the Republican Party's long-standing, unequivocal support for Israel and see aid money flowing to the country as yet another misguided foreign intervention. They include Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a staunch Trump ally, who has echoed the rhetoric of progressive Democrats in recent days. I can unequivocally say that what happened to innocent people in Israel on Oct. 7th was horrific. Just as I can unequivocally say that what has been happening to innocent people and children in Gaza is horrific. This war and humanitarian crisis must end! she wrote on Sunday on X. On Monday night, she went further, calling what is happening in Gaza genocide. But Greene's comments do not represent MAGA as a whole. On Monday, podcaster Charlie Kirk, who leads the powerful Turning Point network, railed against what he deemed a propaganda campaign trying to make it seem as if Israel is intentionally starving the people of Gaza.
Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- Indian Express
UCLA reaches $6 million settlement with Jewish students and professor over campus protests
The University of California, Los Angeles, reached a $6 million settlement with three Jewish students and a Jewish professor whose lawsuit against the university argued it violated their civil rights by allowing pro-Palestinian protesters in 2024 to block their access to classes and other areas on campus. The settlement comes nearly a year after a preliminary injunction was issued, marking the first time a US judge had ruled against a university over their handling of on-campus demonstrations against Israel's war in Gaza. UCLA initially had argued that it had no legal responsibility over the issue because protesters, not the university, blocked Jewish students' access to areas. The university also worked with law enforcement to thwart attempts to set up new protest camps. But U.S. District Judge Mark Scarsi disagreed and ordered UCLA to create a plan to protect Jewish students on campus. The University of California, one of the nation's largest public university systems, has since created systemwide campus guidelines on protests. How the university handled dispersing the encampment in the spring drew widespread criticism. One night, counterprotesters attacked the pro-Palestinian encampment, throwing traffic cones and firing pepper spray, with fighting that continued for hours, injuring more than a dozen people, before police stepped in. The next day, after hundreds defied orders to leave, more than 200 people were arrested. In March, the Trump administration joined the lawsuit filed by the Jewish students and Jewish professor as it opened new investigations into allegations of antisemitism at Columbia University; the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Minnesota; Northwestern University and Portland State University. Last week, Columbia agreed to pay $200 million as part of a settlement to resolve investigations into alleged violations of federal antidiscrimination laws and restore more than $400 million in research grants. The Trump administration plans to use its deal with Columbia as a template for other universities, with financial penalties that are now seen as an expectation for future agreements. On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division found UCLA violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 'by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.' 'UCLA failed to take timely and appropriate action in response to credible claims of harm and hostility on its campus,' said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. The university has said that it's committed to campus safety and will continue to implement recommendations. 'Today's settlement reflects a critically important goal that we share with the plaintiffs: to foster a safe, secure and inclusive environment for all members of our community and ensure that there is no room for antisemitism anywhere on campus,' University of California Board of Regents Chair Janet Reilly said in a statement. As part of the settlement agreement, UCLA must ensure Jewish students, faculty and staff are not excluded from anything on-campus. The $6.13 million settlement will pay the plaintiffs' damages and legal fees. About $2.3 million will go to eight organizations that combat antisemitism, the university said. A group of 35 pro-Palestinian students, faculty members, legal observers, journalists and activists also has filed a lawsuit against UCLA, alleging the university failed to protect those who participated in the demonstrations. Some Jewish students have also taken part in protests on campuses around the country against Israel's war in Gaza. During the 2014 protests at UCLA, at least 15 pro-Palestinian protesters were injured and the tepid response by authorities drew criticism from political leaders as well as Muslim students and advocacy groups.
