Advisory for APS School Students

Introduction 

Due to the rapid growth of high-capability AI systems around the world, growing concerns regarding safety, accountability, and governance have arisen throughout the world; thus, California has responded by passing the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (TFAIA), the first state statute focused on "frontier" (highly capable) AI models. This statute is unique in that it does not only target harms caused by AI models in the form of consumer protection as compared to the majority of state statutes; rather, this statute addresses the catastrophic and systemic risks to society associated with large-scale AI systems. As California is a global technology leader, the TFAIA is positioned to have a significant impact on both domestic regulation and the evolution of international legal frameworks for AI technology (and as such has the potential to influence corporate compliance practices and the establishment of global norms related to the use of AI).

Understanding the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act

The Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act provides a specific regulatory process for companies that create sophisticated AI systems with societal, economic, or national security implications. Covered developers are required to publish an extensive safety and transparency policy that details how they navigate risk throughout the artificial intelligence lifecycle. The act requires developers to notify the government of any significant incidents or failures with their deployed frontier models on a timely basis.

A significant aspect of the TFAIA is that it establishes the concept of "process transparency", which does not explicitly control how AI developers create their models, but rather holds them accountable for their internal safety governance by mandating that they develop Documented safety frameworks that outline risk assessment, mitigation, and monitoring processes. The act allows developers to protect their trade secrets, patents, and national defense concerns by providing them with limited opportunities for exemption and/or redaction of their documents so that they can maintain a balance between data openness and safeguarding sensitive information..

Extraterritorial Impact on Global AI Developers

While the Act is a state law, its implementation has far-reaching effects. Many of the largest AI companies have facilities, research labs or customers in California. Therefore, to be compliant with the TFAIA, these companies are required to do so commercially. The ability to develop a unified compliance model across regions enables companies to avoid developing duplicate compliance models.

This same pattern has occurred in other regulatory areas, like data protection regulations; where a region's regulations effectively became global compliance benchmarks for that regulatory area. The TFAIA could similarly serve as a global standard for transparency in frontier AI and shape how companies build their governance structure globally even if they don't have explicit regulations in the regions where they operate.

Influence on International AI Regulatory Models

The TFAIA offers a unique perspective on global discussions about regulating AI. In contrast to other legislation which defines different levels of risk depending on the type of AI, the TFAIA targets specifically high-impact or emerging technologies. Other nations may see value in this model of tiered regulations based on capability and apply it for their own regulation of AI, with the strictest obligations placed on those with the most critical potential harm.

The TFAIA may serve as a guide for international public policy makers by showing how they can reference existing standards and best practices in developing regulations, thus improving interoperability and potentially lessening regulatory barriers to cross-border AI innovations.

Corporate Governance, Compliance Costs, and Competition

From an industry perspective, the Act revolutionizes the way companies govern themselves. Developers are now required to create thorough risk assessments, red-teaming exercises, incident response protocols, and have board oversight for AI safety and regulation. The number of people involved in this process increases accountability but at the same time the increases will create a burden of cost for all involved.

The burden of compliance will be easier for large tech companies than for smaller or start-ups, and thus large tech companies may solidify their position of dominance over the development of frontier AI. Smaller and newer developers may be blocked from entering the market unless some form of proportional or scaled compliance mechanism for where they operate emerges. These developments certainly raise issues surrounding innovation policy and competition law at a global scale that will need to be addressed by regulators in conjunction with AI safety concerns.

Transparency, Public Trust, and Accountability

The TFAIA bolsters the capability of citizens, researchers and journalists to oversee the development and the use of artificial intelligence (AI) through its requirement for public disclosure of the safety framework of AI systems. The disclosures will allow citizens, researchers and journalists to critically evaluate corporate claims of responsible AI development. Over time, this evaluation could increase trust in publically regulated AI systems and would expose businesses that exhibit a poor risk management process.

However, how useful this transparency is depends on the quality and comparability of the information being disclosed. Many current disclosures are either too vague or too complex, thus limiting the ability to conduct meaningful oversight. There should be a push for clearer guidance and/or the establishment of standardised disclosure forms for the purposes of public accountability (i.e., citizens) and uniformity between countries.

Conclusion

The Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act is a transformative development in the regulation of Artificial Intelligence Technology, specifically, a whole new risk profile of this new generation of AI / (Advanced High-Powered) Technologies such as Autonomous Vehicles. This new California law will create global impact because it Be will change how technology companies operate, create regulatory frameworks and develop standards to govern/oversee the use of Autonomous Vehicles. The Act creates a “transparent” means for regulating (or governing) Autonomous Vehicles as opposed to relying solely on “technical” means for these systems. As other regions experience similar challenges that US Government is facing with respect to this new generation of AI (written laws), California's approach will likely be used as an example for how AI laws are written in the future and develop a more unified and responsible international AI regulatory framework.

‍

References

1. https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/california-enacts-landmark-ai-transparency-law-transparency-frontier-artificial
2. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/09/29/governor-newsom-signs-sb-53-advancing-californias-world-leading-artificial-intelligence-industry/ 
3. https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/251001-california-enacts-ai-safety-transparency-regulation-tfaia-sb-53 ‍
4. https://www.dlapiper.com/en/insights/publications/2025/10/california-law-mandates-increased-developer-transparency-for-large-ai-models

Introduction

Artificial Intelligence (AI) driven autonomous weapons are reshaping military strategy, acting as force multipliers that can independently assess threats, adapt to dynamic combat environments, and execute missions with minimal human intervention, pushing the boundaries of modern warfare tactics. AI has become a critical component of modern technology-driven warfare and has simultaneously impacted many spheres in a technology-driven world. Nations often prioritise defence for significant investments, supporting its growth and modernisation. AI has become a prime area of investment and development for technological superiority in defence forces. India’s focus on defence modernisation is evident through initiatives like the Defence AI Council and the Task Force on Strategic Implementation of AI for National Security.

The main requirement that Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS) require is the “autonomy” to perform their functions when direction or input from a human actor is absent. AI is not a prerequisite for the functioning of AWSs, but, when incorporated, AI could further enable such systems. While militaries seek to apply increasingly sophisticated AI and automation to weapons technologies, several questions arise. Ethical concerns have been raised for AWS as the more prominent issue by many states, international organisations, civil society groups and even many distinguished figures.

Ethical Concerns Surrounding Autonomous Weapons

The delegation of life-and-death decisions to machines is the ethical dilemma that surrounds AWS. A major concern is the lack of human oversight, raising questions about accountability. What if AWS malfunctions or violates international laws, potentially committing war crimes? This ambiguity fuels debate over the dangers of entrusting lethal force to non-human actors. Additionally, AWS poses humanitarian risks, particularly to civilians, as flawed algorithms could make disastrous decisions. The dehumanisation of warfare and the violation of human dignity are critical concerns when AWS is in question, as targets become reduced to mere data points. The impact on operators’ moral judgment and empathy is also troubling, alongside the risk of algorithmic bias leading to unjust or disproportionate targeting. These ethical challenges are deeply concerning.

Balancing Ethical Considerations and Innovations

It is immaterial how advanced a computer becomes in simulating human emotions like compassion, empathy, altruism, or other emotions as the machine will only be imitating them, not experiencing them as a human would. A potential solution to this ethical predicament is using a 'human-in-the-loop' or 'human-on-the-loop' semi-autonomous system. This would act as a compromise between autonomy and accountability.

A “human-on-the-loop” system is designed to provide human operators with the ability to intervene and terminate engagements before unacceptable levels of damage occur. For example, defensive weapon systems could autonomously select and engage targets based on their programming, during which a human operator retains full supervision and can override the system within a limited period if necessary.

In contrast, a ‘human-in-the-loop” system is intended to engage individual targets or specific target groups pre-selected by a human operator. Examples would include homing munitions that, once launched to a particular target location, search for and attack preprogrammed categories of targets within the area.

International Debate and Regulatory Frameworks

The regulation of autonomous weapons that employ AI, in particular, is a pressing global issue due to the ethical, legal, and security concerns it contains. There are many ongoing efforts at the international level which are in discussion to regulate such weapons. One such example is the initiative under the United Nations Convention on CertainConventional Weapons (CCW), where member states, India being an active participant, debate the limits of AI in warfare. However, existing international laws, such as the Geneva Conventions, offer legal protection by prohibiting indiscriminate attacks and mandating the distinction between combatants and civilians. The key challenge lies in achieving global consensus, as different nations have varied interests and levels of technological advancement. Some countries advocate for a preemptive ban on fully autonomous weapons, while others prioritise military innovation. The complexity of defining human control and accountability further complicates efforts to establish binding regulations, making global cooperation both essential and challenging.

The Future of AI in Defence and the Need for Stronger Regulations

The evolution of autonomous weapons poses complex ethical and security challenges. As AI-driven systems become more advanced, a growing risk of its misuse in warfare is also advancing, where lethal decisions could be made without human oversight. Proactive regulation is crucial to prevent unethical use of AI, such as indiscriminate attacks or violations of international law. Setting clear boundaries on autonomous weapons now can help avoid future humanitarian crises. India’s defence policy already recognises the importance of regulating the use of AI and AWS, as evidenced by the formation of bodies like the Defence AI Project Agency (DAIPA) for enabling AI-based processes in defence Organisations. Global cooperation is essential for creating robust regulations that balance technological innovation with ethical considerations. Such collaboration would ensure that autonomous weapons are used responsibly, protecting civilians and combatants, while encouraging innovation within a framework prioritising human dignity and international security.

Conclusion

AWS and AI in warfare present significant ethical, legal, and security challenges. While these technologies promise enhanced military capabilities, they raise concerns about accountability, human oversight, and humanitarian risks. Balancing innovation with ethical responsibility is crucial, and semi-autonomous systems offer a potential compromise. India’s efforts to regulate AI in defence highlight the importance of proactive governance. Global cooperation is essential in establishing robust regulations that ensure AWS is used responsibly, prioritising human dignity and adherence to international law, while fostering technological advancement.

References

●     https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/reaim-summit-ai-war-weapons-9556525/

●     https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2024/04/25/the-road-less-travelled-ethics-in-the-international-regulatory-debate-on-autonomous-weapon-systems/

●     https://disarmament.unoda.org/the-convention-on-certain-conventional-weapons/background-on-laws-in-the-ccw/

●     https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/5FD01B5A96116766C3B1273490B24897/S0892679423000357a.pdf/banning-autonomous-weapons-a-legal-and-ethical-mandate.pdf

●     https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1846937

Executive Summary:

In the digital world, people are becoming targets more and more of online scams, which rely on deception. One of the ways the social media is being used for the elections in recent time, is the "BJP - Election Bonus" offer that promises a cash prize of Rs. 5000 or more, through some easy questionnaire. This article provides the details of this swindle and reveals its deceptive tricks as well as gives a set of recommendations on how to protect yourself from such online fraud, especially during the upcoming elections.

False Claim:

The "BJP - Election Bonus" campaign boasts that by taking a few clicks of the mouse, users will get a cash prize. This scheme is nothing but a fake association with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)’s Government and Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi and therefore, it uses the images and brands of both of them to give the scheme an impression of legitimacy. The imposters are taking advantage of the public's trust for the Government and the widespread desire for remuneration to ensnare the unaware victims, specifically before the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.

‍

The Deceptive Scheme:

• Tempting Social Media Offer: The fraud begins with an attractive link on the social media platforms. The scammers say that the proposal is related to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) with the caption of “The official party has prepared many gifts for their supporters.” accompanied by an image of  the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi.

• Luring with Money: The offer promises to give Rs.5,000 or more. This is aimed at drawing in people specifically during election campaigns; and people’s desire for financial gain.

• Tricking with Questions: When the link is clicked, the person is brought to the page with the simple questions. The purpose of these questions is to make people feel safe and believe that they have been selected for an actual government’s program.

• The Open-the-Box Trap: Finally, the questions are answered and the last instruction is to open-the-box for the prize. However, this is just a tactic for them to make you curious about the reward.

• Fake Reward and Spreading the Scam: Upon opening the box, the recipient will be greeted with the text of Rs. 5000. However, this is not true; it is just a way to make them share the link on WhatsApp, helping the scammers to reach more victims.

The fraudsters use political party names and the Prime Minister's name to increase the plausibility of it, although there is no real connection. They employ the people's desire for monetary help, and also the time of the elections, making them susceptible to their tricks.

Analytical Breakdown:

• The campaign is a cleverly-created scheme to lure people by misusing the trust they have in the Government. By using BJP's branding and the Prime Minister's photo, fraudsters aim to make their misleading offer look credible. Fake reviews and cash reward are the two main components of the scheme that are intended to lure users into getting involved, and the end result of this is the path of deception.
• Through sharing the link over WhatsApp, users become unaware accomplices that are simply assisting the scammers to reach an even bigger audience and hence their popularity, especially with the elections around the corner.
• On top of this, the time of committing this fraud is very disturbing, as the election is just round the corner. Scammers do this in the context of the political turmoil and the spread of unconfirmed rumors and speculation about the upcoming elections in the same way they did earlier. The fraudsters are using this strategy to take advantage of the political affiliations by linking their scam to the Political party and their Leaderships.

• We have also cross-checked and as of now there is no well established and credible source or any official notification that has confirmed such an offer advertised by the Party.

• Domain Analysis: The campaign is hosted on a third party domain, which is different from the official website, thus creating doubts. Whois information reveals that the domain has been registered not long ago. The domain was registered on 29th march 2024, just a few days back.   

• Domain Name: PSURVEY[.]CYOU
• Registry Domain ID: D443702580-CNIC
• Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.hkdns.hk
• Registrar URL: http://www.hkdns.hk
• Updated Date: 2024-03-29T16:18:00.0Z
• Creation Date: 2024-03-29T15:59:17.0Z (Recently Created)
• Registry Expiry Date: 2025-03-29T23:59:59.0Z
• Registrant State/Province: Anhui
• Registrant Country: CN (China)
• Name Server: NORMAN.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM
• Name Server: PAM.NS.CLOUDFLARE.COM

Note: Cybercriminals used Cloudflare technology to mask the actual IP address of the fraudulent website.

CyberPeace Advisory and Best Practices:

• Be careful and watchful for any offers that seem too good to be true online, particularly during election periods. Exercise caution at a high level when you come across such offers, because they are usually accompanied by dishonest schemes.

• Carefully cross-check the authenticity of every campaign or offer you’re considering before interacting with it. Do not click on suspicious links and do not share private data that can be further used to run the scam.

• If you come across any such suspicious activity or if you feel you have been scammed, report it to the relevant authorities, such as the local police or the cybercrime section. Reporting is one of the most effective instruments to prevent the spread of these misleading schemes and it can support the course of the investigations.

• Educate yourselves and your families on the usual scammers’ tricks, including their election-related strategies. Prompt people to think critically and a good deal of skepticism when they meet online offers and promotions that evoke a possibility to obtain money or rewards easily.

• Ensure that you are always on a high level of alert as you explore the digital field, especially during elections. The authenticity of the information you encounter should always be verified before you act on it or pass it over to someone else.

• In case you have any doubt or worry regarding a certain e-commerce offer or campaign, don’t hesitate to ask for help from reliable sources such as Cybersecurity experts or Government agencies. A consultation with credible sources will assist you in coming up with informed decisions and guarding yourself against being navigated by these schemes.

Conclusion:

The "BJP - Election Bonus" campaign is a real case study of how Internet fraud is becoming more popular day by day, particularly before the elections. Through the awareness of the tactics employed by these scammers and their abuse of the community's trust in the Government and political figures, we can equip ourselves and our communities to avert becoming the victim of such fraudulent schemes. As a team, we can collectively strive for a digital environment free of threats and breaches of security, even in times of high political tension that accompany elections.

‍