Urgent.News

What's breaking now, across thousands of outlets.

AI

OpenAI and Anthropic call for new laws on artificial intelligence

OpenAI and Anthropic representatives told a UK parliamentary committee that voluntary pledges are insufficient and called for binding AI laws, statutory frameworks, and mandatory incident reporting. The hearing highlighted divisions among major tech firms regarding self-regulation and government oversight. The British parliament's Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee held a hearing,…

OpenAI and Anthropic representatives urged UK lawmakers to establish binding AI laws during a parliamentary committee hearing. They argued that voluntary pledges alone are inadequate and called for statutory frameworks and mandatory incident reporting. The Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee held the hearing to expose disagreements between major tech firms and demonstrate that self-regulation is unreliable.

OpenAI's vice president Tom Duff Gordon supported a legal framework and international treaty, while Anthropic's head of Europe Liam Booth-Smith called for binding rules. In contrast, Google DeepMind's Owen Larter and Meta's Rob Sherman did not endorse a new legal framework. Government officials acknowledged that current control relies solely on voluntary compliance, with AI security institute head Henry de Zoete admitting limited authority to prevent dangerous model releases.

The hearing also featured testimony from former OpenAI employees who argued that companies should not be left to control their own security.

Written by urgent.news from Dev.to's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.

This story

This is one outlet's version. Read the fullest account.

Read the original at dev.to →

More in AI

Prompts don't enforce budgets. Signatures do.

A spending limit written in a prompt is not a control. It is a piece of text, sitting in the same context window as everything else the model reads, competing for the model's attention with the task…

  • Spending limits in prompts are not enforced by the model.
  • Real enforcement occurs through server-side checks.
  • Veyline performs scoped, signed authorization before transactions.

Log what your tools put in the context window before blaming the model

Ask an agent for one person's sales calls since February 1 and it can come back with calls that person wasn't on, even though the right ones were in its context.

  • Agent returned unrelated sales calls due to large context window
  • 30,000+ tokens consumed over a month and a half
  • Logging insertion point helps identify wrong claims

Test document extraction before an agent acts on it

An agent can follow its instructions perfectly and still pay the wrong amount, because the parser misread a table in the invoice. The agent never sees the PDF, only the extraction.

  • Agent relies on extracted data, not original PDF
  • Parser errors can cause workflow failure
  • Accuracy threshold advised at 95%

More from Tuesday 13 October →