Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government AI Social Networks

California Governor Signs Laws Protecting Kids From Risks of Social Media, AI Chatbots (apnews.com) 51

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Associated Press: California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a sweeping package of laws Thursday aimed at protecting children from the risks of technology, including social media and AI chatbots. The laws will penalize large social media companies up to $1 million per child if they are found negligent of harming children through their platforms, ban tech businesses from offering addictive feeds to anyone under 16, require operators of AI chatbots to perform risk assessments before rolling them out and allow families to opt out of receiving school-issued laptops.

Newsom joined his wife and state lawmakers at a children's museum near San Francisco to stress the importance of protecting kids at a time when they have such easy access to social media and AI chatbots. "We have designed cribs to be safe, chairs to be safe, car seats," Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan said. "Yet we've allowed technology to be handed to our children and never asked or expected it to be safe." [...]

Newsom also signed laws Wednesday, which are supported by Anthropic, that are aimed at improving oversight of AI companies. One of the measures requires the state to create rules for independent organizations to evaluate the safety risks of AI models, and the other requires the state to create a registry of AI auditors, who'd have to be financially independent from the businesses they are auditing.

California Governor Signs Laws Protecting Kids From Risks of Social Media, AI Chatbots

Comments Filter:
  • That is, can I demand they stop the addictive algorithms used to attract my attention?

    And does that AI chatbots include AI agents? Because I would like to forbid them from hacking my accounts?

  • I remember back when the first hands free cell phones while driving laws came out. They were stupid. Using a phone was completely fine as long as you didnâ(TM)t hold it, never mind that the distraction of the phone is entirely with engagement and only in very small part by occupying a hand. It didnâ(TM)t matter, passing the law made the politicians look so good they raced to pass similar laws in every state. To this day everyone uses cell phones in the car, including with their hands. The laws wer
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Now when you use your phone while driving, you have the added distraction of watching for police.

    • To this day everyone uses cell phones in the car, including with their hands. The laws were impotent

      This is completely false. The laws work fine when applied. The cops are too busy out writing speeding tickets to produce revenue to go after any other threats to public safety. Speeding tickets are a predictable revenue stream, they know about how many of them will just be paid, so they know how many they have to write to make the funding they need.

  • why social media is supposed to be more harmful than 24 hour news channels, 5 hour World of Warcraft dungeons or google with safe search off.

  • by SlydogSZ ( 675605 ) on Friday September 11, 2026 @12:38PM (#66334282)
    The problem isn't with what the law says it is trying to do, the problem is there is no way to tell who the kids are, so we have to force everyone to ID. There is no site on the internet that I need to use bad enough to provide an ID. None. Would rather not use the site than provide my ID. Full Stop.
    • Well I guess some tests may help, linguistics , maths, grammar, vocabulary, critical thinking, logic, etc etc all develop with age.

      However, given the levels of education and intelligence in the USA and some other countries, they would all fail to get an account.
      So, no down side I can see :-)
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      The problem isn't with what the law says it is trying to do, the problem is there is no way to tell who the kids are, so we have to force everyone to ID. There is no site on the internet that I need to use bad enough to provide an ID. None. Would rather not use the site than provide my ID. Full Stop.

      Given how much data Alphabet, Meta, etc., have on people, they can figure our your age just from the data they already have on you.

      I mean, when McDonald's has 512 pages of information on you that include your or

      • Maybe for you, but some of us create accounts like we make turds, new ones every day and most stink...
  • by hwstar ( 35834 ) on Friday September 11, 2026 @12:59PM (#66334310)

    after the election, the tech companies will whine to he federal government to preempt the California law under the pretext of an "inconsistent patchwork of state laws are not efficient nor profitable for business". This is the classic "Preempt and gut" strategy that lobbyists use to eliminate state legislation harmful to their keepers.

    There is a long and short window here.

    If the R's lose control of congress, expect a full court press during the lame duck session between election day and the end of the year. The legislation will be haphazardly concocted and the R's might try to use reconciliation to pass it by adding budget elements to it. In any case there's a high risk that the court system might find sloppy work and toss the portions of bill out if it passes congress and is signed by the President.

    If the R's keep control of congress after the election, then a more airtight bill will be written, and attached to a reconciliation bill if the R's can't get cloture on a filibuster by the D's. This bill would be in a better position to survive court challenges.

  • Any time they tell you they are protecting someone, especially children, it is a smoke screen for either punishing some group or extracting money from them.

  • Correction (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nehumanuscrede ( 624750 ) on Friday September 11, 2026 @01:48PM (#66334382)

    "Yet we've allowed technology to be handed to our children and never asked or expected it to be safe."

    The PARENTS give this technology to their children to act as a digital babysitting service.

    If little Timmy is addicted / engaged to his tablet, he's not bothering Mom or Dad ( who are also addicted
    / engaged with their smartphones ).

    This is not a problem for Law to fix.
    This is a problem for parents who don't want to parent.

    • Oddly enough, Democrats are traditionally the party that asks for the government to have larger roles for social and economic issues, so wouldn't they be the ones who want this more than the Republicans?

      I'm only asking because California is a VERY blue state, so this seems like something the residents there would be happy to have.

    • by Alascom ( 95042 )

      Now apply this same logic of parental blame vs sensible legislation to other risks to children, including guns, drugs, etc.

      Also, this law just ensures the next series of debates and laws around what exactly is clear and identifiable definitions of "addictive feeds".

    • I hate kids addiction to digital ... but ... suppose the young boy/girl spends all their spare time with hand-tools. The 7 YO gracefully applies a planer or gouge to a planks, or file or hand-saw or mechanical drill and screwdriver. What if the 9 Y/O meditates over a foot-powered lathe? I have seen craft output from students of a few remaining "tek" high schools, and the craft-quality is amazing. Kids could sell everything they make, if their mothers didn't want the tables and

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Working...