Former CISA executive director Bridget Bean has raised concerns over China’s rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI). She highlights the risks of China’s potentially ‘dystopian’ AI models and cyber-biological weapons. Bean emphasizes the need for U.S. innovation and safeguarding advanced chip technology to maintain global leadership.

Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Greg Casar introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, a legislative proposal targeting American AI developers with severe penalties. The bill suggests halting advanced AI development and creating a federal agency to oversee the destruction of non-compliant tech systems. This move is compared to restricting nuclear weapon development.

The legislation specifically targets AI systems capable of matching or surpassing human cognitive abilities. Such systems include those that might resist shutdown commands, conduct unauthorized cyberattacks, or threaten U.S. government stability. Critics express concern that these measures would cripple U.S. innovation, providing an advantage to countries like China and Russia.

Daniel Castro, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, warned that a permanent ban on superhuman AI research would harm U.S. economic and national security interests. AI expert Gary Marcus also criticized the proposal as overly broad, although he agrees that some aspects warrant consideration.

The bill outlines criminal and corporate consequences similar to those for nuclear weapon development. Companies attempting to bypass the ban could face a ‘corporate death penalty,’ losing the legal right to do business in the U.S. Individuals like engineers and executives could face up to 20 years in prison.

To enforce the ban, a new federal AI agency would monitor advanced systems and have the power to remove non-compliant technology. The criteria for banned AI include any model capable of planning the ‘disempowerment of humanity’ or executing cyberattacks against the U.S. government.

Industry advocates argue that such extreme penalties disregard practical aspects of tech infrastructure and risk management. Aden Hizkias, a policy director at the Chamber of Progress, criticized the proposal as ‘knee-jerk policymaking.’ Hizkias calls for tech firms to build trust by being transparent and meeting environmental standards.