US president-elect Donald Trump did not talk a great deal about artificial intelligence (AI) while on the campaign trail, which is odd. Voters liked the potential improvements he could bring to the economy and inflation, yet AI could displace many jobs and one-third of Americans believe it would do more harm than good, according to Gallup.
If Trump’s silence means he does not care much about AI, that leaves the door open for policy to be steered by other key players in his administration, particularly Elon Musk.
AI has long been a major focus for Musk. He was an early investor in Google’s DeepMind, cofounded OpenAI and now runs xAI, which has raised more than US$6 billion to build powerful AI models.
But while everything seems to point toward both Trump and Musk wanting to create a light-touch regulatory environment, where AI companies accelerate their research and development, the wildcard in all this is Musk’s personal credo.
Musk has long worried about what AI can do to humanity as it becomes more capable. He cofounded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015 because he was concerned that Google’s acquisition of DeepMind would give a single corporation control over AI, as it surpasses human intelligence and leave such powerful technology vulnerable to misuse.
Musk went on to found Neuralink in part to help humans stay ahead of any artificial superintelligence that might wipe us out.
“We need to get there before the AI takes over,” he told his engineers in a 2022 meeting documented by Bloomberg News’ Ashlee Vance, who wrote a biography of Musk.
Years in the making, his doom-laden views on AI run so deep that they were the reason he broke up his friendship with Google cofounder Larry Page.
“The final straw was Larry calling me a ‘species-ist’ for being pro-human consciousness instead of machine consciousness,” Musk told CNBC’s David Faber last year.
Musk might be a thin-skinned narcissist, but he is also a purist for whom money is a means by which to achieve grander goals, and he will put ideology and ego before his financial interests. Musk’s purchase of Twitter, for instance, has helped him cultivate valuable influence among Republicans and with Trump himself even while its value has cratered, and it has hemorrhaged advertisers.
Among the little Trump has said on AI has been a promise to rescind US President Joe Biden’s executive order on AI, enacted last year, under which standards bodies, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology, check that tech firms are developing AI safely and ethically.
The president-elect has also long talked about staying ahead of China, meaning he would look favorably on policies that help US tech firms maintain supremacy over their Chinese counterparts.
However, if Musk reaches the unique position of shaping national rules around AI, he will likely want to use that perch to make good on his ideology. That would do more for his ego than loosening the regulatory rules on AI, which would help his competitors just as much as it would help xAI and Tesla.
That in mind, if Trump does rescind Biden’s executive order as he has promised, expect him to replace it with something that does not look too different, in that tech firms would still be required to run safety checks on their models.
Also expect a loosening of rules over what chatbots say. Trump has said he wants to see AI development “rooted in free speech” and Musk, who despises the so-called “woke mind virus,” also believes AI models are far too censored.
As it happens, most chatbots outside of xAI’s Grok are carefully designed to be cautious about what they say.
A recent study by academic researchers at ETH Zurich, LatticeFlow AI and the Institute for Computer Science, Artificial Intelligence and Technology found that the biggest large language models made by companies like Google, OpenAI and Meta scored high on preventing their bots from spewing harmful or toxic content.
Musk’s worries about AI doom do not make him a safe pair of hands for AI policy. Just look at what has happened to Twitter under his watch. Poisonous rhetoric against immigrants and people of color has proliferated on the platform, making it an unwelcome place for marginalized groups, while conspiracy theories have little trouble going viral, often thanks to posts by Musk himself.
The tech industry needs rules to keep AI from going rogue in the future, but today’s models are also riddled with gender and racial biases, according to the study by ETH and LatticeFlow.
Targeting any efforts to address that as “censorship” threatens to make the problem of fairness in AI systems worse than it already is. That could lead to more insidious harm from AI in the near future.
Parmy Olson is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology. A former reporter for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, she is author of Supremacy: AI, ChatGPT and the Race That Will Change the World.
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) concludes his fourth visit to China since leaving office, Taiwan finds itself once again trapped in a familiar cycle of political theater. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has criticized Ma’s participation in the Straits Forum as “dancing with Beijing,” while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) defends it as an act of constitutional diplomacy. Both sides miss a crucial point: The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world. The disagreement reduces Taiwan’s
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is visiting China, where he is addressed in a few ways, but never as a former president. On Sunday, he attended the Straits Forum in Xiamen, not as a former president of Taiwan, but as a former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. There, he met with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧). Presumably, Wang at least would have been aware that Ma had once been president, and yet he did not mention that fact, referring to him only as “Mr Ma Ying-jeou.” Perhaps the apparent oversight was not intended to convey a lack of
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
RSS