{"id":9509,"date":"2025-02-24T14:17:00","date_gmt":"2025-02-24T14:17:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/?p=9509"},"modified":"2025-02-24T14:17:00","modified_gmt":"2025-02-24T14:17:00","slug":"the-war-on-ai-will-deregulating-ai-in-the-u-s-bolster-its-global-dominance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/blogs\/the-war-on-ai-will-deregulating-ai-in-the-u-s-bolster-its-global-dominance\/","title":{"rendered":"The War on AI: Will Deregulating AI in the U.S. Bolster its Global Dominance?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A few days after being in office, President Trump dismantled the safeguards set in place by the Biden administration.<\/a> One of President Trump\u2019s first actions was repealing the Biden administration\u2019s Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence.<\/a> This repeal included the National Security Memo governing national security use of AI.<\/a> Instead, Trump issued an executive order on AI requiring the executive branch to review current AI policies that serve as barriers to AI innovation in the United States.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump\u2019s Executive Order prioritizes AI development, whereas Biden\u2019s Executive Order placed significant emphasis on responsible AI development, especially in addressing risks like national security vulnerabilities.<\/a> Specifically, national security priorities are shifting from extensive interagency cooperation to assess the risks of AI to reducing federal oversight and focusing on a more flexible regulatory environment while maintaining US AI leadership.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, Trump\u2019s deregulatory approach happened when other jurisdictions moved toward stricter regulations. <\/a>The Chinese start-up, Deepseek, for example, is an \u201copen-source generative artificial intelligence model that rivals the most advanced offerings from U.S.-based OpenAI\u2014and does so for a fraction of the cost.<\/a>\u201d Researchers behind Deepseek claim it costs $6 million to train, a fraction of the \u201cover $100 million\u201d spent on OpenAI.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While first met with concern, U.S. investors have welcomed the development of Deepseek.<\/a> Major cloud platforms like Microsoft and Amazon Web Services have integrated various models based on Deepseek R-1.<\/a> However, whether this is the start of technological cooperation or increased global competition is unclear. To bolster global dominance, Trump\u2019s EO plans to release an action plan within 180 days by White House tech and science officials, including a new advisor for AI and Crypto.<\/a> This EO came during the launch of the $500 billion U.S. Stargate Project, involving private sector investments for AI infrastructure in the United States.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With this cross-border interaction, American AI\u2019s need for energy and capital without regulations could lead to powerful innovations abroad, far beyond U.S. control, leaving more vulnerabilities to espionage.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This new flexibility will allow AI companies room to bolster AI without regulatory challenges. However, this deregulation of AI may intensify misinformation and discrimination.<\/a> Indeed, for large companies, regulating AI could create barriers like high costs and requirements for developers. However, could leaving discretion to these companies to regulate also pose privacy or misinformation issues? With China\u2019s Deepseek catching up to the U.S. in its potential on one hand, deregulation could encourage companies to advance AI and, therefore, keep the U.S. in this dominant position. However, the real issue lies in prioritizing global dominance over the potentially significant harm that individuals would face with AI. The possibilities with the evolution of AI and some are even concerned with AI becoming too powerful and eventually taking control out of human hands.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even with this new approach to AI, the biggest threat may still be national security. With China demonstrating capabilities to create similar AI programs for cheaper, the Trump Administration\u2019s lack of regulations could pose a significant issue because the United States may not have full control over its AI development. American companies will look to build more advanced AI models, maybe in places overseas that offer significant energy without much regulation.<\/a>\u00a0 With this cross-border interaction, American AI\u2019s need for energy and capital without regulations could lead to powerful innovations abroad, far beyond U.S. control, leaving more vulnerabilities to espionage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sanam Sohrabian<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sanam attended the University of Alabama where she majored in Psychology and minored in Criminal Justice. Her hobbies include chess, weightlifting, and volunteering when she can. Currently, she is a 2L at UNC and a member of the Asian American Law Students Association and Iranian American Bar Association.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A few days after being in office, President Trump dismantled the safeguards set in place by the Biden administration. One of President Trump\u2019s first actions was repealing the Biden administration\u2019s Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. This repeal included the National Security Memo governing national security use of …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[51],"tags":[416,297,634,606],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9509"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9509"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9509\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9511,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9509\/revisions\/9511"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9509"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9509"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9509"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}