OpenAI asks California watchdog to probe whos really behind tailored AI ballot measures: Serious questions | Latest Tech News
Sam Altman’s OpenAI has requested a key California political finance watchdog to examine the local resident behind a pair of AI-related ballot measures over what the company described as “serious questions” about his potential motives, The Post has realized.
The criticism to California’s Fair Political Practices Commission, or FPPC, references East Bay native Alexander Oldham, who filed two pending proposals that, if permitted, would empower state officers to regulate major AI corporations – in half by placing a particular focus on policing public benefit firms. OpenAI lately transformed into such an entity.
As The Post solely reported earlier this month, Oldham is the stepbrother of Zoe Blumenfeld, a senior worker at OpenAI’s chief rival Anthropic, and he also has ties to tech entrepreneur Guy Ravine, who has waged a bitter legal battle with OpenAI over who got here up with the concept for the company.
The Post has not seen any evidence that Ravine was concerned in the ballot initiative and he’s not talked about by title in OpenAI’s submitting.
Oldham’s measures “appear to be designed to impose complex and unnecessary regulatory burdens on OpenAI,” an OpenAI lawyer writes in the criticism, a copy of which was obtained by The Post.
OpenAI alleged that Oldham might have violated state lobbying guidelines, including failure to make required disclosures.
A normal view of an OpenAI emblem as seen on a cellphone in Hawthorne, NJ on March 31, 2023. OpenAI is the dad or mum company of the wildly common ChatGPT artificial intelligence chatbot. (Photo/Christopher Sadowski) Christopher Sadowski
“Experts stated and warned that the initiatives’ language is surgically tailored to target OpenAI’s unique public benefit corporation structure and could empower regulators to single out specific companies rather than set industry-wide standards — all while Mr. Oldham maintains ties to a businessman with a long-running dispute against OpenAI. These connections raise serious questions about who is really behind this effort,” the criticism states.
Oldham had “no known background in AI policy or political campaigns” prior to submitting the ballot proposals, the criticism provides.
OpenAI’s legal professionals allege that Oldham “appears to be a stand-in to obscure two of the measures’ true backers” and ask the watchdog company to explore whether or not he has any ties to a nonprofit called Coalition for AI Nonprofit Integrity (CANI).
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman attends the AI Impact Summit in New Delhi, India, on Feb. 19. AFP via Getty Images
CANI is publicly backing a separate ballot proposal filed by Poornima Ramarao, the mom of an ex-OpenAI employee-turned-whistleblower who was ruled to have died by suicide, that goals to reverse OpenAI’s restructuring.
OpenAI alleges that the three measures “have unmistakable formatting similarities, suggesting that they were drafted by the same individuals.”
The Post has not seen any evidence that Oldham has a connection to CANI.
OpenAI beforehand accused CANI of obscuring its funding and violating state lobbying legal guidelines requiring public disclosures. The company has also accused CANI of presumably being a entrance for Elon Musk, who is at present suing OpenAI for abandoning its nonprofit mission.
The FPPC dismissed OpenAI’s initial criticism against CANI last fall, citing a lack of enough evidence of marketing campaign finance violations.
Notably, OpenAI’s lawyer doesn’t accuse Anthropic of involvement in the initiative.
OpenAI’s legal professionals have requested the California Fair Political Practices Commission to look into the ballot measures and who is backing them.
In the new criticism, OpenAI’s legal professionals draw a parallel between Oldham’s low-profile background and the background of onetime CANI President Jeffrey Mark Gardner — a New York-based LSAT teacher who led the nonprofit despite having no obvious connection to California or the AI industry. Gardner has since stepped down.
“When major political activity moves through opaque entities, it erodes public trust and clouds informed decision-making,” OpenAI’s exterior law firm Jenner & Block said in a assertion. “We respectfully ask the FPPC to encourage full candor and transparency so the public can evaluate these efforts on their merits.”
Oldham’s ballot measures acquired a title and abstract from the California attorney normal’s workplace earlier this month – which means he might start gathering the more than 500,000 signatures required to put them up for a vote this fall.
The FPPC and CANI didn’t immediately return The Post’s request for remark on OpenAI’s submitting.
Oldham said Friday he’s “not connected to CANI” and referred to his earlier assertion on the ballot measures.
Earlier this month, he told The Post that he crafted the ballot measures utilizing AI chatbots because he needed to “create a public document to spark a necessary debate on AI regulation and get the public thinking about these ideas.” He denied that he collaborated with anybody, including legal professionals, to craft them.
The Fair Political Practices Commission dismissed a related criticism by OpenAI last 12 months. FPPC
“Let me make this very clear: Neither Guy Ravine nor Zoe Blumenfeld are involved in this initiative,” Oldham told The Post in a written assertion. “I haven’t been in touch with Guy Ravine in nearly a decade and I have not been in touch with Zoe in more than two years. This initiative was filed, created, and funded by me.”
Anthropic also denied any connection, stating it “has had no involvement in, coordination with, or knowledge of any ballot proposals filed by Alexander Oldham, and the company does not support either proposal.”
Ravine vehemently denied that he had colluded with Oldham in any approach or had any foreknowledge about the ballot measures, a sentiment echoed by Oldham.
“I have had no involvement in his initiative,” Ravine said. “I have not been in contact with Alex Oldham in approximately 10 years. My only connection to him is that his mother was an investor in a company I was involved with over a decade ago – a tenuous link at best.”
He also famous that he does “not have the financial resources to fund ballot initiatives.”
Stay informed with the latest in tech! Our web site is your trusted source for breakthroughs in artificial intelligence, gadget launches, software program updates, cybersecurity, and digital innovation.
For recent insights, professional coverage, and trending tech updates, go to us frequently by clicking right here.