# AI regulation smackdown isn't over > CEOs are split on whether AI needs safety rules, and Trump's position keeps shifting. - Title: AI regulation smackdown isn't over · The Verge | Shortify - Summary: CEOs are split on whether AI needs safety rules, and Trump's position keeps shifting. The AI industry is deeply divided on regulation, with some CEOs pushing… - Keywords: ai regulation, anthropic, openai, dario amodei, sam altman, mark zuckerberg, elon musk, jensen huang, trump administration, ai safety, industry framework, government oversight - Source: The Verge — https://theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/997706/the-ai-regulation-smackdown-isnt-over - Author: Hayden Field - Published: 2026-09-19T13:00:00+00:00 - Read time: 3 min - Topics: ai regulation, anthropic, openai, dario amodei, sam altman, mark zuckerberg, elon musk, jensen huang, trump administration, ai safety, industry framework, government oversight ## CEOs were briefly aligned on AI safety Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei proposed a three-step plan for slowing AI development: embedding third-party evaluators in labs, coordinating across the industry, and forging international agreements. OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and even Elon Musk seemed to agree. ## Companies saw regulation as good PR Anthropic and OpenAI had been hinting they were working on an industry framework. Appearing pro-regulation looked like both a good PR move and a way to address fallout from hacking incidents. ## Trump administration calls safety a hoax The Trump administration attacked the idea of an AI safety crisis, calling it a hoax. This makes government involvement in regulation look like a non-starter for now. ## Meta and Nvidia killed the regulator idea Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg came out against limiting companies' autonomy. The Wall Street Journal reported that Zuckerberg, Musk, and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang scuttled proposals for an industry-funded independent regulator, similar to FINRA in finance. ## OpenAI still pushes for safety standards OpenAI's global affairs chief Chris Lehane said government has an important role in AI safety. Congress should create a framework with mandatory national safety standards for frontier AI while supporting American innovation. > Government has an important role too. Congress should turn that momentum into a framework that strengthens safety. ## VCs see regulation as inevitable An anonymous AI venture capitalist said regulation was necessary, comparing it to safety standards that emerged for electricity, cars, and airplanes. Early technology is always wild and unruly before standards emerge. > You see these moments in every technology... where the industry had to come together to find a way to say, 'How do we collectively embrace what safety means?' ## Zuckerberg distances himself from slowdown Meta pointed to Zuckerberg's X post distancing himself from calls for a slowdown and regulation. He wrote that every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train models safely. > Every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely. ## Trump's AI position keeps shifting Trump called AI fears a hoax and said the only guardrails AI needs is a strong president. Yet he signed Executive Order 13960 six years ago creating principles for federal AI use protecting privacy and civil rights. > The robots will not be taking over. ## Trump's positions are driven by vibes Trump isn't necessarily fully anti-regulation, but he's driven more by vibes than consistent policy. He's not buying the existential risk argument, so government guardrails may look nothing like what OpenAI or Anthropic want. ## Real problem isn't robots taking over Nick Reese, former DHS director of emerging tech policy, said framing AI safety as robots coming to get us distorts the core problem. The real issue is AI that isn't physical but is hurting humans now. ## We regulate things we can't afford to fail Reese said we regulate things like the financial sector and airlines because we can tolerate no failure. We build systems and checks to prevent harm. Yet somehow AI is exempted from that same scrutiny. > We regulate things that we can tolerate no failure on... We build systems and checks and quality assurance and fallback mechanisms to make sure that those things don't harm life or harm us systemically. ## Public pressure could shift Trump's stance As AI advances and the public pushes back through protests and boycotts, calls for regulation are increasing. This pressure could influence Trump's current position on AI oversight. ## Key takeaway The AI industry is deeply divided on regulation, with some CEOs pushing for safety standards while others resist, and the Trump administration's stance remains inconsistent and unpredictable.