In your opinion, should AI regulation be handled at a federal level, or be left up to the states?

Federal level (58%) – "While I’m all for supporting the idea of states' rights, experience has shown that this often leaves important issues at loose ends. Some states will act to protect their citizens, others will yield to private interests (large political donations) and leave their citizens high and dry. A single open regulatory authority would better ensure fairness."

• "AI is a great tool, but bad actors have already found horrible uses for it, so it must be regulated. If states have the right to make their own legislation, we will have 50 wildly discordant laws and rules. Since AI use will only grow as a daily part of our lives, we need one law of the land to keep it as a useful, helpful tool and not allow it to be misused through loopholes in inconsistent laws."

"This is another one of those situations, like banking or interstate commerce, where, if you don't control it at the federal level, you make it impossible for a company to function in the US. Introduce areas where the states can insert some degree of difference if needed (like speed limits on highways or tax on income), but other than that, it must be the same and give the citizens an equally powerful solution regardless of what state they happen to be in."

• "Ideally, this should be handled at the federal level for consistency. But in the absence of federal regulation, states should be able to step in."

"There needs to be a Federal Standard enacted by Congress which provides basic guidelines such as child safety and adherence to other standards and laws such as copyright. AI does not think and does not have the ability to predict, prevent harm or follow law intent; it simply arranges data using algorithms. It currently is simply a somewhat logical but unpredictable data processor without guardrails, intelligence or morals. AI without guardrails doesn't need to be publicly available on the internet but could be closed off without outside access in government or research environments to permit advancement/refinement of the process where 'anything goes'."

State level (30%) – "Changing laws at a federal level takes too much time and bureaucracy. With rapidly changing AI states are better positioned to be nimble in enacting laws to protect people. States also historically lead the curve in consumer protections; California’s data privacy regulations are the premier example of a law that helps consumers but is expensive for companies to update data handling processes internally. The greater good here is consumer protections."

• "I understand the argument for a federal law, but we have states rights. I do think they can withhold project funding for states that don't follow the guidelines."

"The gridlock at the federal level will leave us with an AI Wild West. Although it is important that regulation leave breathing room for innovation, the rush to market attitude of AI developers have left consumers with barely tested technology that hallucinates and has provided disastrous counsel to those using it for advice."

Unsure/other (12%) – "If our federal government was an intelligent functioning body capable of making good decisions, I would tend to think that one unified regulation makes more sense. However, in the current case, I believe that the individual states would have better judgment."