this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
680 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

82329 readers
4371 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
680
Musk fails to block California data disclosure law he fears will ruin xAI (arstechnica.com)
submitted 21 hours ago by tonytins@pawb.social to c/technology@lemmy.world
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Elon Musk’s xAI has lost its bid for a preliminary injunction that would have temporarily blocked California from enforcing a law that requires AI firms to publicly share information about their training data.

xAI had tried to argue that California’s Assembly Bill 2013 (AB 2013) forced AI firms to disclose carefully guarded trade secrets.

The law requires AI developers whose models are accessible in the state to clearly explain which dataset sources were used to train models, when the data was collected, if the collection is ongoing, and whether the datasets include any data protected by copyrights, trademarks, or patents. Disclosures would also clarify whether companies licensed or purchased training data and whether the training data included any personal information. It would also help consumers assess how much synthetic data was used to train the model, which could serve as a measure of quality.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world -3 points 17 hours ago

so, i see that the article mentioned discord's leak, but it did not say that california was going after discord next. that was kind of my point.

yeah, it's identity verification, not age verification, but once they have gone the step of ID verification, why do they need to bother snooping the chats? they already know who you are. they can just pull your online ID and whatever is associated with it. it's one step further in the game, if they get it we've lost whatever anonymity we thought we had (unless we pile the entire family's devices onto one ID and that's an anonymizing tactic but not great).