In general, which of the following best describes your opinion regarding California’s new landmark law regulating AI companion chatbots?

It’s overly restrictive (7%) – "You cannot regulate it just like you cannot regulate computers because it doesn’t work - always a way around. It is just a set of rules so they can blame companies when people use tools for the wrong things."

It’s about right (41%) – "It’s about right… for now. AI is a technology that, like the internet itself, DOES require restrictions and protections, especially for younger users. The vast unexplored applications for AI make me a little nervous. But! That’s the great thing about regulatory laws; they can change and adapt with the times.California is ahead of the curve in comparison to other states and is absolutely doing the right thing."

• "I agree with the legislation, but I think it's unlikely to really help in most cases. It might help with the youngest children, who honestly shouldn't be using AI to begin with, but it won't help with anyone over the age of 12 who already knows how to get around barriers."

"Generally I think Newsom is a raging idiot driving his state into the ground, however I support and applaud these regulations. It's a great first step to protecting kids and how they interact with AI chats. Newsom is in a unique position to enact legislation like this due to many tech companies being HQed out of Silicon Valley, and good for him for signing it."

• "I think it's brave that California is doing anything about this issue, and I think anything is better than nothing. These measures, if enacted, seem like they could really help."

It’s not enough regulation (42%) – "I believe our children should have safeguards against this information just like they would on the internet. Chat gpt is too realistic and too informative for some young children and teens (and even adults) and to always understand that its not a real person."

• "We're barreling straight into a national mental health crisis with AI companions that is so, so avoidable. It is incredibly foolish for us as a society to not create guardrails."

"As usual, California addresses what is politically popular rather than was is most effective to fix a problem. This is another piecemeal approach that misses the core of the problem which is kids failing to learn how to address social connectivity in real life and instead becoming 'addicted' to technology which, although created by humans is NOT the same as social interaction with others in person."

• "AI needs to be more regulated all around. California has had better regulatory legislation pass but vetoed by Gov Newsom. AI is changing the world around us daily and the creators as usual see profit over human life. Let's hope laws get passed that finally start covering crimes."

Unsure/other (10%) – "The law is a good try, but doesn’t address what really needs to happen. We need to teach ourselves and our children how to manage our own minds and establish our own boundaries. We need to teach resilience, empathy, and value for ourselves as well as others unlike ourselves."