"OpenAI’s surveillance language has many potential loopholes and they can do better" by Tom Smith
Published: March 5, 2026
Duration: 14:27
(The author is not affiliated with the Department of War or any major AI company.)
There's a lot of disagreement about the new surveillance language in the OpenAI–Department of War agreement. Some people think it's a significant improvement over the previous language.[1] Others think it patches some issues but still leaves enough loopholes to not make a material difference. Reasonable people disagree about how a court will interpret the language, if push comes to shove.
But here's something that should be much easier to agree on: the language as written is ambiguous, and OpenAI can do...
There's a lot of disagreement about the new surveillance language in the OpenAI–Department of War agreement. Some people think it's a significant improvement over the previous language.[1] Others think it patches some issues but still leaves enough loopholes to not make a material difference. Reasonable people disagree about how a court will interpret the language, if push comes to shove.
But here's something that should be much easier to agree on: the language as written is ambiguous, and OpenAI can do...