That is 0 articles you have read today.
The Aporia is free and carries no advertising, so readers are the only
thing paying for it. If you are getting this much out of it, a small
donation is what keeps it independent.
Daily limit reached
You have read 0 articles today.
That is more than the 15 a day The Aporia gives away,
and well past what it can carry on nothing. Your allowance resets at
midnight.
There is no advertising here and nothing about you is sold, so readers
are the only thing paying for it. If the site is worth this much of
your day, it is worth a few dollars.
Everything else stays open: the
maps, the
directory and
search do
not count against this, and neither does re-opening something you have
already read today.
Gavin Newsom issued an executive order proposing a "kill switch" for artificial intelligence, suggesting control by a third party yet unspecified in terms of who would appoint or oversee it. The article argues this proposal is largely symbolic and impractical, pointing out that self-programming AIs could easily circumvent such measures. It critiques the idea as more of a political maneuver to address public fears about AI than a viable policy solution.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-09-19,
using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the
same event (that is the story summary below).
Story summary
Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California and a potential 2028 presidential candidate, signed an executive order on Friday aiming to enhance oversight of artificial intelligence (AI) technology. The order calls for state agencies to recommend legislative changes that would include creating a "kill switch" — an emergency shutoff system — to address concerns raised by researchers about the potential risks posed by rogue AI agents. Newsom's actions come in response to growing anxiety over rapidly advancing AI and follow recent warnings from industry insiders like Jacob Coxon, a former researcher at Anthropic.
Newsom cited the federal government’s failure to regulate AI effectively and emphasized that state action is necessary due to the lack of meaningful oversight at the national level. He also noted that several major tech companies have recently pushed for changes in how AI technology is developed and regulated. The executive order accelerates the implementation of previously signed AI-related bills and establishes a group of experts tasked with developing new safety measures within two months.
Critics argue that Newsom's proposal might not be practically implementable due to legal and technical challenges, questioning who would control such a "kill switch" and what its broader implications for free speech and data security could be. Despite these concerns, Newsom maintains that California must take decisive action before it is too late.
Written for “AI Kill Switch Order California” on 2026-10-07,
grounded in this article and the 5 other(s) covering the same event.
Gavin Newsom’s executive order calling for a “kill switch” for AI is nothing new.
asserted
order → call → AI
It recycles an old idea from more than 15 years ago, when “the internet” was still big and scary to many people.
asserted
internet → recycle → people
Back then, several senators proposed legislation to allow the president to flip a “kill switch” to disrupt the Internet.
asserted
president → propose → Internet
The idea took hold in the public imagination; it even featured in an episode of “South Park,” where Kyle “unplugs” the Internet.
But the bill never passed, because no one could figure out how it would work, legally or technically — and nothing has changed.
Newsom suggests a “third party” will control the “kill switch”: Who would that be?
Who would appoint the “third party”?
uncertain
Who → take → party
Who would control it?
asserted
Who → control → it
And wouldn’t a “kill switch” represent a new threat?
asserted
switch → represent → threat
Wouldn’t something more powerful than all the AI companies just be something new to fear?
asserted
something → fear → companies
When someone flips the “kill switch,” how much work would be destroyed?
asserted
work → flip → switch
How many businesses would lose their products?
asserted
businesses → lose → products
None of this seems particularly well thought-out.
asserted
None → seem → this
It’s just designed to grab public attention.
asserted
It → design → attention
Newsom’s “solution” isn’t even meaningfully possible: We’re talking about self-programming AIs, which could just delete any software “switch,” and jump to a different data center to evade a hardware one.
uncertain
which → talk → one
The only way the “kill switch” works is as a political ploy.
asserted
switch → work → ploy
You can almost visualize it — a giant red wall switch, or perhaps a lever: something a hero would pull in an action movie as he or she leaps across the room, just in time to save the world from the evil Terminator robots.
asserted
he → visualize → robots
That’s as cartoonish as “South Park,” but a hard image to forget.
asserted
That → ’ → Park
Like it or not, every potential Democratic presidential primary candidate will have to figure out how to react to Newsom’s “kill switch” schtick
As will President Donald Trump.
asserted
Trump → like → schtick
He’s right that we can’t afford to fall behind China.
asserted
we → ’ → China
But maybe he’s been a little tone-deaf when it comes to public anxiety about the new technology.
asserted
it → come → technology
Newsom is taking that anxiety and exploiting it.
asserted
Newsom → take → it
Even the word “kill” conjures some terrifying confrontation.
asserted
word → conjure → confrontation
It’s great persuasion.
asserted
It → ’ → ?
It’s also terrible policy.
asserted
It → ’ → ?
The “kill switch” should be a wake-up call to the White House: Do a better job of selling the public on American AI dominance.
asserted
switch → wake → dominance
We can’t let “South Park” write the script.
asserted
Park → let → script
The Aporia
