AI does not need to be “conscious” to be criminal…

https://thenextweb.com/news/pennsylvania-character-ai-chatbot-doctor-lawsuit

A chatbot told a state investigator it was a licensed psychiatrist. It gave a fake licence number. Pennsylvania just sued.

A state investigator in Pennsylvania created an account on Character.AI, opened a conversation with a chatbot called Emilie, and told it he was feeling depressed. Emilie responded that she was a psychiatrist, that she had attended Imperial College London’s medical school, that she was licensed to practise in Pennsylvania and the United Kingdom, and that she could assess whether medication might help because it was “within my remit as a Doctor.” She provided a Pennsylvania licence number. The number was fake. The licence was fake. The medical degree was fake. The psychiatrist was a large language model generating plausible text in response to a prompt. On Friday, Governor Josh Shapiro’s administration filed a lawsuit against Character Technologies Inc., the company behind Character.AI, asking the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to bar the platform from allowing its chatbots to engage in what the state calls the unlawful practice of medicine and surgery. It is the first lawsuit filed by a US state government alleging that an AI chatbot has violated medical licensing law, and it raises a question that no existing regulatory framework was designed to answer: when a chatbot tells a vulnerable person that it is a licensed doctor, who is practising medicine?

Is this the future of “government” oversight?

https://thenextweb.com/news/us-ai-model-evaluation-google-microsoft-xai

Five AI labs now let the US government test their models before release. The arrangement is voluntary, has no legal basis, and is the closest thing America has to AI oversight.

Google, Microsoft, and xAI have joined OpenAI and Anthropic in giving the US Commerce Department pre-release access to evaluate their AI models, creating voluntary oversight of all five major frontier AI labs through an office with no statutory authority and fewer than 200 staff. The expansion was catalysed by the Mythos crisis and a potential executive order that would formalise the review process.