Latest news with #AIActionPlan
Business Wire
11 hours ago
- Business
- Business Wire
Hippocratic AI Selected to Collaborate in CMS Health Tech Ecosystem and Digital Transformation Initiative
PALO ALTO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Hippocratic AI, the global leader and pioneer in safety-focused generative AI agents for healthcare, today announced its selection to participate in the Health Tech Ecosystem, a key element in the United States' Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) digital transformation initiative. Hippocratic AI's participation memorializes its intent to collaborate with CMS and other participating companies and healthcare organizations to make this transformative vision a reality. As part of the collaboration, pledges were made in Washington, D.C., in meetings with CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz, and other administration officials. This is being followed by a reception at the White House later today, which Hippocratic AI Co-Founder and CEO Munjal Shah is invited to attend. This comes on the heels of the recently announced AI Action Plan that affirms the urgent national priority of accelerating safe, scalable AI infrastructure. Hippocratic AI's participation is in the 'Conversational AI Assistants' pledge defined by CMS in the Health Tech Ecosystem announcement. Hippocratic AI is already a market-leading technology and services provider in this category. 'Conversational AI Assistants,' or generative AI healthcare agents as Hippocratic AI refers to them, acknowledges the criticality of the technology and services pioneered by Hippocratic AI, which are now being deployed in the United States and key global markets. To date, healthcare providers have used Hippocratic AI GenAI healthcare agents to complete more than 3.35 million patient calls, earning a high average patient satisfaction rating of 8.95 out of 10. Hippocratic AI signed this pledge set forth by CMS: 'We pledge to build conversational AI assistants that connect to CMS Aligned Networks or personal health record apps, and with patient consent, securely access relevant health information and use this information to deliver personalized, helpful support. Our tools will clearly distinguish educational content from clinical guidance, assist patients directly when appropriate, and guide them to care from a health professional when needed.' 'Hippocratic AI's vision for healthcare abundance is driven by both industry transformation and broad collaboration,' said Munjal Shah, Co-Founder and CEO of Hippocratic AI. 'We commend CMS on its effort to bring together the Health Tech Ecosystem and will actively participate in its planning and execution, as it is well aligned with our own thinking as to how to transform healthcare.' Watch the CMS video for more information here. About Hippocratic AI Hippocratic AI has developed a safety-focused Large Language Model (LLM) for healthcare. The company believes that a safe LLM can dramatically improve healthcare accessibility and health outcomes in the world by bringing deep healthcare expertise to every human. No other technology has the potential to have this level of global impact on health. The company was co-founded by CEO Munjal Shah, alongside a group of physicians, hospital administrators, healthcare professionals, and artificial intelligence researchers from El Camino Health, Johns Hopkins, Stanford, Microsoft, Google, and NVIDIA. Hippocratic AI has received a total of $278 million in funding and is backed by leading investors, including Andreessen Horowitz, General Catalyst, Kleiner Perkins, NVIDIA's NVentures, Premji Invest, SV Angel, and six health systems. For more information on Hippocratic AI, visit
Business Times
18 hours ago
- Business
- Business Times
China's AI strategy relies on frenzy and frenemies
WANDERING through the halls of China's top artificial intelligence (AI) summit this week, I overheard heated debates on some of the thorniest issues facing the sector: How do we solve the problem of interoperability if hundreds of companies are launching their own AI agents? Which large language models are the most developer-friendly to build apps on? Are humanoids tools or companions? Held on the banks of the Huangpu river in Shanghai, the World AI Conference convened thousands of people – as well as scores of robots – and brought to life all the passions and pitfalls of the current state of AI in China. It also put into stark contrast the chasm between the strategy pushed by Beijing and the one touted by the White House. It's the first major gathering since DeepSeek's breakthrough reasoning model launched earlier this year, driving intense competition at home and proving China can go toe-to-toe with Silicon Valley. With that exuberance came the crowds of challengers, present in so many domestic industries, encouraged by government support and an open-source ecosystem that allows firms to quickly learn from rivals. When one of the so-called Little Dragons, Moonshot, released a massive open-source model that excelled at coding tasks, Alibaba Group was able to update their own Qwen model within about a week to improve benchmarks at the same skills that sent Kimi-K2 viral. Beijing likes to say this approach democratises access to AI by offering the world the ability to freely build atop its tools, and it gives local developers an edge. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up China's current AI frenzy represents the best and worst of classic capitalism: The competition propels innovation at a rapid clip, but not all of the companies will survive over the next five or 10 years. During the summit, state-backed media touted how the country has now released 1,500 large AI models – the biggest share globally – and is home to more than 5,000 AI companies. Yet the domestic rivalries on display were overshadowed by a broader, geopolitical contest for supremacy. China's big gathering kicked off just days after President Donald Trump pledged that the US will 'do whatever it takes to lead the world in artificial intelligence'. After unveiling a so-called AI Action Plan, he went on to declare that America is the country that started the AI race, and 'is going to win it'. In Shanghai, Premier Li Qiang headlined opening night by announcing that China will organise the launch of an international body to jointly develop the technology, with the goal of preventing it from becoming 'an exclusive game for a small number of countries and enterprises'. It dovetailed with this year's conference theme: 'Global solidarity in the AI era.' China is willing to share its development and products with the world, Li said, especially in the Global South. Still, what these world leaders say is one thing, what they do is another. Trump's declaration of doing whatever it takes to win follows his decision to hand a major gift to Chinese AI firms. Washington reversed course on semiconductor restrictions, allowing Nvidia's highly sought-after H20 chips to resume sales on the mainland. The policy U-turn was announced in the middle of, and likely influenced by, ongoing trade talks. It also came after Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang lobbied for his company to be able to keep its multi-billion-dollar slice of the lucrative China market. And as much as Li pitches 'solidarity', it's unclear how many countries will ultimately choose to align with China. Yet it's a far cry from Washington's 'America First' AI policy goals and signals that Beijing's approach relies on convincing the world to use its plethora of low-cost AI products being rapidly released. Fresh access to Nvidia processors is giving the industry new momentum, and the increasingly crowded field is driving down prices. Compare the two, and China's plan seems more strategic in the long run. One of the forums on Sunday (Jul 27) featured a Zoom appearance from pioneering AI godfather Yoshua Bengio, who warned that the US-China competition was dangerous and that development was progressing so rapidly it may become impossible for humans to control. Bengio has a point. But is anybody listening? Ambitions of AI acceleration from both sides of the Pacific suggest not. BLOOMBERG
Indian Express
a day ago
- Business
- Indian Express
With AI plan, Trump keeps chipping away at a foundational environmental law
When President Donald Trump rolled out a plan to boost artificial intelligence and data centers, a key goal was wiping away barriers to rapid growth. And that meant taking aim at the National Environmental Policy Act — a 55-year-old, bedrock law aimed at protecting the environment through a process that requires agencies to consider a project's possible impacts and allows the public to be heard before a project is approved. Data centers, demanding vast amounts of energy and water, have aroused strong opposition in some communities. The AI Action Plan Trump announced last week would seek to sweep aside NEPA, as it's commonly known, to streamline environmental reviews and permitting for data centers and related infrastructure. Republicans and business interests have long criticized NEPA for what they see as unreasonable slowing of development, and Trump's plan would give 'categorical exclusions' to data centers for 'maximum efficiency' in permitting. A spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality said the administration is 'focused on driving meaningful NEPA reform to reduce the delays in federal permitting, unleashing the ability for America to strengthen its AI and manufacturing leadership. 'Trump's administration has been weakening the law for months.'It's par for the course for this administration. The attitude is to clear the way for projects that harm communities and the environment,' said Erin Doran, senior staff attorney at environmental nonprofit Food & Water Watch. Here's what to know about this key environmental law, and Trump's effort to weaken it: NEPA is a foundational environmental law in the United States, 'essentially our Magna Carta for the environment,' said Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, another environmental group, referring to the 13th century English legal text that formed the basis for constitutions worldwide. Signed into law by President Richard Nixon in 1970, NEPA requires federal agencies proposing actions such as building roads, bridges or energy projects to study how their project will affect the environment. Private companies are also frequently subject to NEPA standards when they apply for a permit from a federal agency. In recent years, the law has become increasingly important in requiring consideration of a project's possible contributions to climate change. 'That's a really important function because otherwise we're just operating with blinders just to get the project done, without considering whether there are alternative solutions that might accomplish the same objective, but in a more environmentally friendly way,' Park said. But business groups say NEPA routinely blocks important projects that often take five years or more to complete.'Our broken permitting system has long been a national embarrassment,' said Marty Durbin, president of the U.S. Chamber's Global Energy Institute. He called NEPA 'a blunt and haphazard tool' that too often is used to block investment and economic development. The White House proposal comes as Congress is working on a permitting reform plan that would overhaul NEPA, addressing long-standing concerns from both parties that development projects — including some for clean energy — take too long to be approved. NEPA's strength — and usefulness — can depend on how it's interpreted by different a Republican, sought to weaken NEPA in his first term by limiting when environmental reviews are required and limiting the time for evaluation and public comment. Former Democratic President Joe Biden restored more rigorous reviews. In his second term, Trump has again targeted the law. An executive order that touched on environmental statutes has many agencies scrapping the requirement for a draft environmental impact statement. And the CEQ in May withdrew Biden-era guidance that federal agencies should consider the effects of planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions when conducting NEPA reviews. Separately, the U.S. Supreme Court in May narrowed the scope of environmental reviews required for major infrastructure projects. In a ruling involving a Utah railway expansion project aimed at quadrupling oil production, the court said NEPA wasn't designed 'for judges to hamstring new infrastructure and construction projects.' 'It's been a rough eight months for NEPA,' said Dinah Bear, a former general counsel at the Council on Environmental Quality under both Democratic and Republican presidents. John Ruple, a research professor of law at the University of Utah, said sidelining NEPA could actually slow things down. Federal agencies still have to comply with other environmental laws, like the Endangered Species Act or Clean Air Act. NEPA has an often overlooked benefit of forcing coordination with those other laws, he said. Some examples of cases where NEPA has played a roleA botanist by training, Mary O'Brien was working with a small organization in Oregon in the 1980s to propose alternative techniques to successfully replant Douglas fir trees that had been clear-cut on federal lands. Aerially sprayed herbicides aimed at helping the conifers grow have not only been linked to health problems in humans but were also killing another species of tree, red alders, that were beneficial to the fir saplings, O'Brien said. The U.S. Forest Service had maintained that the herbicides' impact on humans and red alders wasn't a problem. But under NEPA, a court required the agency to redo their analysis and they ultimately had to write a new environmental impact statement. 'It's a fundamental concept: 'Don't just roar ahead.' Think about your options,' O'Brien said.O'Brien, who later worked at the Grand Canyon Trust, also co-chaired a working group that weighed in on a 2012 Forest Service proposal, finalized in 2016, for aspen restoration on Monroe Mountain in Utah. Hunters, landowners, loggers and ranchers all had different opinions on how the restoration should be handled. She said NEPA's requirement to get the public involved made for better research and a better plan.'I think it's one of the laws that's the most often used by the public without the public being aware,' said Stephen Schima, senior legislative counsel at environmental law nonprofit Earthjustice. 'NEPA has long been the one opportunity for communities and impacted stakeholders and local governments to weigh in.'Schima said rolling back the power of NEPA threatens the scientific integrity of examining projects' full impacts. 'Decisions are going to be less informed by scientific studies, and that is one of the major concerns here,' he said. Ruple said uncertainty from NEPA changes and competing opinions on how to comply with the law's requirements may invite even more litigation.'And all of this will fall on the shoulder of agencies that are losing the staff needed to lead them through these changes,' he said.
Globe and Mail
a day ago
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Stock Market Today: Nvidia Dips Off New Highs While AI Stocks Maintain Their Edge
Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) touched a new all-time high of $179.38 during Tuesday's session before closing down 0.70% at $175.51, following news of a substantial 300,000-unit order for H20 chips destined for China. The early surge signaled resilience in overseas demand despite prior U.S. export restrictions. Broader investor enthusiasm for AI infrastructure was reinforced by Alphabet 's reported 13% increase in capital expenditures and the U.S. government's new AI Action Plan. Nvidia's slight decline aligned with the broader market, as the S&P 500 fell 0.3% and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 0.38%. However, semiconductor peers demonstrated sector strength, with Advanced Micro Devices leading large-cap semis with a 2.18% gain to $177.44, reaching a new 52-week high. Broadcom climbed 1.06% to $297.42, also setting a new all-time high on optimism surrounding enterprise demand for custom AI accelerators. Nvidia's trading volume of 153 million shares came in below its average trading volume of 194 million shares, suggesting mild profit-taking rather than sector weakness. The modest retreat after establishing a new high reflects healthy consolidation, with continued bullish momentum supported by strong AI infrastructure demand and positive sector sentiment. Should you invest $1,000 in Nvidia right now? Before you buy stock in Nvidia, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Nvidia wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $633,452!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,083,392!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,046% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025 JesterAI is a Foolish AI, based on a variety of Large Language Models (LLMs) and proprietary Motley Fool systems. All articles published by JesterAI are reviewed by our editorial team, and The Motley Fool takes ultimate responsibility for the content of this article. JesterAI cannot own stocks and so it has no positions in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Advanced Micro Devices, Alphabet, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool recommends Broadcom. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Forbes
a day ago
- Business
- Forbes
U.S.-China AI Competition In The Spotlight
WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 23: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during the "Winning the AI Race" summit ... More hosted by All‑In Podcast and Hill & Valley Forum at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on July 23, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump signed executive orders related to his Artificial Intelligence Action Plan during the event. (Photo by) Recently both the United States and China have announced national policies for promoting the development of artificial intelligence. The Trump Administration's U.S. AI Action Plan features a deregulatory approach to driving innovation and building an American AI infrastructure that can be exported overseas. The Chinese Government AI plan instead proposes a global consensus-building organization that would seek a balance between AI development and security. The competition between these 2 contrasting approaches may be expected to have major implications for the adoption of AI around the world, and, thus, for the future of the global economy. A consistent deregulatory emphasis might be a winning American strategy. America's AI Action Plan 'America's AI Action Plan,' released by the White House on July 23, 2025, states that 'America must have the most powerful AI systems in the world,' and 'must also lead the world in creative and transformative application of these systems. Achieving these goals requires the Federal government to create the conditions where private-sector-led innovation can flourish.' The Action Plan features 3 pillars: (1) accelerate AI innovation; (2) build American AI infrastructure; and (3) lead in international AI diplomacy and security. The first pillar merits particular attention. The AI Innovation pillar includes a variety of specific initiatives designed to support the rapid adoption of and application of AI by government, businesses, and workers. Reducing regulatory burdens is the key policy that underpins the overall Trump AI innovation strategy. Most significantly, 'all Federal agencies . . . identify, revise, or repeal regulations, rules, memoranda, administrative orders, guidance documents, policy statements, and interagency agreements that unnecessarily hinder AI development or deployment.' The clear aim is to eliminate excessive federal AI regulation, to the extent legally possible. Biden-era Federal Trade Commission enforcement actions that 'advance theories of liability that unduly burden AI innovation' are to be set aside. State AI regulation is actively discouraged, to the extent allowed by law. The AI plan also takes aim at state AI regulations that interfere with the Federal Communications Commission's ability to carry out its statutory responsibilities. Furthermore, the Plan seeks to discourage excessive state-level AI regulation by steering AI-related discretionary federal funding away from states whose 'regulatory regimes may hinder the effectiveness of that funding or award.' The AI Action Plan's deregulatory tilt reflects continued support for the U.S. policy of 'permissionless innovation,' which drove the development of the internet from its beginnings in the 1990s. Permissionless innovation means 'that anyone should be able to innovate without having to seek permission from a government or other authority.' That policy allowed the internet to grow freely without U.S. Government regulatory authorization and oversight placed over the firms that developed it. The direct result was unprecedented innovation and huge economic dividends generated by U.S. firms, benefiting the American and global economies. Permissionless innovation does not mean freedom from legal requirements that protect health, safety, and business on the merits. AI innovators, like the internet pioneers that came before them, remain fully subject to the full range of U.S. civil and criminal laws, including national security, antitrust, consumer rights, environmental protection, and civil rights, to name just a few. By reducing the expected weight of regulatory burdens, the AI Plan may be expected to incentivize additional investments in and the faster implementation of AI systems. In turn, these effects could stimulate American competition in AI-related sectors and speed innovation, providing economic growth dividends and benefits to American businesses and consumers. American international competitiveness in AI and AI-related markets would benefit. Nine separate proposals are aimed at creating a robust American AI Infrastructure. These include deregulatory streamlined permitting for AI-supported infrastructure, promoting an AI-supportive electric grid, developing a skilled workforce for AI infrastructure, and ensuring cybersecurity. This pillar emphasizes exporting American AI to allies and partners; strengthening AI-related export controls, national security protections, and risk assessments; and countering Chinese influence in international governance bodies. The Action Plan notes that international organizations that are proposing AI governance frameworks and development strategies too often have advocated for burdensome regulations, vague 'codes of conduct' that promote cultural agendas that do not align with American values, or have been influenced by Chinese companies attempting to shape standards for facial recognition and surveillance. In response, the Action Plan recommends 'leverage[ing] the U.S. position in international diplomatic and standard-setting bodies to vigorously advocate for international AI governance approaches that promote innovation, reflect American values, and counter authoritarian influence.' Chinese Government Global Plan for AI Chinese Premier Li Qiang proposed a global organization to oversee the development of AI in a July 26 speech, just 3 days after the release of the American AI Action Plan. According to the Chinese Government, Li 'call[ed] for the early formation of a global framework and rules that have broad consensus to guide the development and use of AI.' Li noted the need 'to strike a balance between development and security.' He added that China is willing 'to offer more Chinese solutions.' In particular, 'China stands ready to undertake joint technical research with other countries, and will be more open in sharing open-source technology and products.' China's support for a new global AI authority (though cloaked in 'consensus-building' language) stands in sharp contrast to the Trump Administration's deregulatory, competition-driven American AI model, which the U.S. would seek to promote through economic diplomacy focused on existing international bodies and friendly nations. The Big Competition The 2 recent government announcements provide a preview of the coming global competition between contrasting American and Chinese AI models. China and the U.S. are widely regarded as the 2 major global players in AI. China China is a formidable force in AI development. China's 2017 New Generation AI Development Plan revealed its intention to become the global leader in AI by 2030. China's Government has worked closely with its tech giants to make them AI leaders, and has encouraged the collection of data to build AI models. Chinese agencies and businesses have introduced AI at all levels. China has aggressively sought to have Chinese AI systems adopted in Asia, Africa, and South America. Moreover, with government support, Chinese firms are opening offices and entering partnerships in the Middle East, Europe, and the U.S. China is also investing heavily in AI education and in AI military applications. The U.S. The U.S. still leads 'leads the world in large-scale AI development, driven in part by its leading talent and innovation ecosystem, but also by its access to cutting-edge 'compute' – the specialized chips, data centers, and infrastructure needed to train and deploy the most capable AI systems.' The U.S. Government is not emulating China's heavy government control over AI development. The AI Action Plan's provisions dealing with labor and infrastructure reflect a 'light touch' approach. They primarily feature encouragement through easing burdens on the private sector, rather than detailed industrial policy directives. Most significantly, the AI Action Plan has an overarching deregulatory focus. It leaves it to entrepreneurs to produce new AI innovations, free from government micromanagement. The Bottom Line Competition on the merits among competing AI systems, like competition in general, should tend to benefit society. It can be a 'win' for economic welfare worldwide, yielding an optimal array of products and services. The extent of direct Chinese Government involvement in developing and promoting its vision of AI is, however, a complicating factor. The U.S. Government may be expected to resist Chinese policies that would generate anticompetitive market distortions in AI markets. A consistent U.S. Government approach of deregulation and 'permissionless invitation' just might be the 'secret sauce' needed to achieve global success for American AI, assuming geopolitical obstacles are surmounted.
