YouCongress
About Sign up

Comment by Andrew Ng

Avatar
Baidu; Stanford CS faculty; founded Coursera and Google Brain
SB 1047 will stifle open source AI and hinder AI innovation [...] and therefore will make AI less safe.
AI Verified source (2024)
Like Share on X 3mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
Open-source AI is more dangerous than closed-source AI
votes Against
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The quote says that stifling open-source AI would make AI "less safe," which clearly implies the author views open-source AI as contributing to safety rather than being more dangerous than closed-source AI. This is a clear opposition to the statement. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 17d ago
Vote inference verification history AI Unverifiable Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Unverifiable The quote says stifling open source "will make AI less safe," which suggests open source has safety benefits, but it does not directly compare open-source AI to closed-source AI. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 17d ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified KQED’s Aug. 29, 2024 article directly attributes this to Andrew Ng, with the sentence beginning “SB 1047 will stifle open source AI...” and later continuing to “...therefore will make AI less safe.” The omitted middle text is present in the article, so the user’s version is a faithful ellipsis from the 2024 source. ([kqed.org](https://www.kqed.org/news/12002254/california-bill-to-regulate-catastrophic-effects-of-ai-heads-to-newsoms-desk)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 18d ago
AI Verified Verified. The quote is attributed to Andrew Ng (Stanford CS, founder of Google Brain/Coursera). The source_url is a KQED article on SB 1047, which returns HTTP 403 to WebFetch, but web search confirmed KQED quotes Ng that "SB 1047 will stifle open source AI and hinder AI innovation," and his widely-documented position (TIME op-ed, X posts, YC speech) that the bill would "make AI less safe." The composite quote ("SB 1047 will stifle open source AI and hinder AI innovation [...] and therefore will make AI less safe") accurately reflects these statements with [...] bridging them. Author attribution is correct. The "against" vote aligns with statement 391 ("Require open source AI models to include safety benchmarks in release notes"): Ng's core, repeatedly-stated objection is to mandated regulatory/safety-compliance burdens on open-source AI models, of which requiring safety-benchmark disclosure in release notes is an instance — so an "against" position is consistent with his documented stance. The quote is relevant to the dataset and to the general meaning of the statement (regulation of open-source AI). Year 2024 is correct and the quote remains relevant; it is kept (not deleted). · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-8 · 20d ago
replying to Andrew Ng