Northeast
AI raises the stakes for national security. Here’s how to get it right
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Regulating advanced AI isn’t a game of checkers. It’s a game of chess.
Every move matters. You have to think several steps ahead. And if you focus only on the next play — or worse, react after the fact — you risk losing the long game.
Today, the United States finds itself at a turning point on AI, where real policy choices are being made. You can see it in the actions underway in both the states and Washington.
In recent months, leaders in both New York and California have passed landmark AI safety legislation. California’s SB 53 took effect on January 1, while New York’s RAISE Act was signed into law by Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul in December and will take effect in 2027.
MIKE DAVIS: CONGRESS MUST STOP BIG TECH’S AI AMNESTY SCAM BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul delivers her State of the State address at Hart Theatre at The Egg in Albany, New York, Jan. 13, 2026. (Heather Ainsworth/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Both states are moving toward approaches that align state and federal law — recognizing that a fragmented, state-by-state patchwork isn’t sustainable. Given their size and economic impact, these moves create a clear path forward for federal action while positioning New York and California to lead the nation into the AI era.
There’s a word for this kind of alignment between state and federal action: harmonization. The federal government sets one clear national standard for the most powerful AI systems — the issues that affect national security and the country as a whole. States continue to focus on the issues closest to people’s daily lives: consumer protection, civil rights and how AI is used in schools, workplaces and public services. Each level of government plays to its strengths.
Think of it as one rulebook with two clear roles and one urgent mission: ensuring the United States maintains its competitive advantage in a technology central to national security and global economic leadership. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said bluntly that whoever leads in AI will lead the world. The United States can’t afford to drift — or to divide itself — at this critical moment.
STATE-LEVEL AI RULES SURVIVE — FOR NOW — AS SENATE SINKS MORATORIUM DESPITE WHITE HOUSE PRESSURE
That’s because AI leadership is increasingly an issue of national security — and national security requires prevention, not punishment after the fact.
When states act alone, they are often forced into a liability-only approach — holding companies accountable after harm has already occurred. Preventing the most serious risks requires access to the technical expertise and classified systems that only the federal government possesses.
That is why our North Star must remain clear: deploying frontier models safely and in a way that best positions the United States to maintain its innovation lead.
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION EYES SWEEPING FEDERAL POWER OVER AI, DRAFT ORDER SHOWS
That prevention-first approach already exists in practice. The Center for AI Standards and Innovation — created by the Biden administration and updated by the Trump administration — gives the federal government the ability to test and evaluate advanced AI systems before they are widely deployed. That kind of centralized testing is essential for managing risks that no single state or company can address on its own.
Without harmonization, AI companies would face a confusing patchwork of conflicting state requirements that slows innovation without improving public safety. With it, companies get clarity and consistency, the public gets stronger protections and states are given clear room to act where they add the most value.
Today, the United States finds itself at a turning point on AI, where real policy choices are being made. You can see it in the actions underway in both the states and Washington.
At the same time, states play a vital role, and the recent moves in New York and California show what that balance looks like in practice. By moving away from fragmented approaches and toward alignment, the two largest innovation economies in the country are helping create a de facto national standard that exists alongside, and not instead of, state action.
WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL PRESSES ALLIES TO FREE AI FROM INNOVATION-KILLING REGULATIONS
This is what harmonization looks like in practice: Washington focuses on the highest-stakes safety issues, while states address kitchen-table ones. It is a third way forward — avoiding both unregulated acceleration and fragmented overreach.
Think about how we handle car safety. We don’t wait for accidents to happen and then rely solely on lawsuits to make cars safer. The federal government sets clear national safety standards. It requires rigorous testing. And it makes seatbelts, airbags, and braking systems mandatory — with strict rules for how well they must perform — before cars ever hit the road. Liability still matters, but prevention comes first, because the stakes are too high to get it wrong.
That balance isn’t new. It’s how the United States has governed aviation, food and drug safety, financial markets and telecommunications. In each case, the federal government set clear national standards for systems that power the entire country, while states continued to play a critical role closer to home. The result wasn’t less innovation or less growth. It was regulatory clarity, economic growth, and American leadership.
CHINA RACES AHEAD ON AI —TRUMP WARNS AMERICA CAN’T REGULATE ITSELF INTO DEFEAT
I saw this dynamic firsthand in 1996, when I was working in the White House just as the internet was beginning to reshape the economy.
Washington faced a choice that feels familiar today: apply old rules to a new technology, or agree on a new national framework built for what was coming next. Democrats and Republicans chose the latter.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
The result was the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It wasn’t perfect, but it got the big things right. It created clear national standards, gave innovators room to build and helped position the United States to lead the internet era that followed.
Think of it as one rulebook with two clear roles and one urgent mission: ensuring the United States maintains its competitive advantage in a technology central to national security and global economic leadership.
The lesson is straightforward. When America sets smart, national standards for emerging technologies, we don’t fall behind — we lead.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The chessboard is set. If the United States focuses on prevention, harmonizes state and federal efforts, and keeps its eyes on that North Star, we can once again lead a defining technological era.
That’s how you win the long game: by playing chess, not checkers.
Read the full article from Here
Northeast
Alleged Tren de Aragua criminal gang members charged in ATM robberies across New England
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Two alleged members of the Venezuelan-linked gang Tren De Aragua (TdA) were charged in an ATM jackpotting conspiracy that included robberies and attempted robberies across New England, according to federal prosecutors.
Moises Alejandro Martinez Gutierrz and Lestter Guerrero, both 29, have been charged with conspiracy to commit bank theft, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts said in a news release.
Officials said both men are in the U.S. illegally.
The duo is accused of robberies and attempted robberies at ATMs in Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Rhode Island. They allegedly installed malware directly into the ATM’s software programming to force the machine to dispense all its cash.
Moises Alejandro Martinez Gutierrz has been charged with conspiracy to commit bank theft. (U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Massachusetts)
Prosecutors said there has been an ongoing federal investigation into a nationwide conspiracy allegedly coordinated and committed by TdA members to steal money from ATMs using malware, a scheme referred to as ATM jackpotting.
Martinez Gutierrez and Guerrero were arrested on Feb. 5 in Augusta, Maine, after an attempted ATM jackpotting robbery, according to charging documents.
Martinez Gutierrez is allegedly connected to at least five other ATM jackpotting robberies across New England, including robberies on Dec. 31 in Norwich, Connecticut; Jan. 20 in Braintree, Massachusetts; Jan. 30 in Rochester, New Hampshire; and attempted robberies Jan. 14 in Coventry, Rhode Island, and Jan. 19 in Stoneham, Massachusetts.
Lestter Guerrero is seen pointing his cellphone at an ATM with Moises Alejandro Martinez Gutierrz in the passenger seat. (U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Massachusetts)
Guerrero is allegedly connected to at least one additional jackpotting robbery, with Martinez Gutierrez, on Jan. 30 in Rochester, New Hampshire.
If convicted on the conspiring to commit bank theft charge, the pair could be sentenced to up to five years in prison, up to three years of supervised release and a fine of up to $250,000.
TdA has allegedly developed revenue sources through a range of criminal activities, including ATM jackpotting to steal millions of dollars from financial institutions, prosecutors said in court documents.
ALLEGED TREN DE ARAGUA LEADER CHARGED IN RACKETEERING CONSPIRACY AND COCAINE TRAFFICKING IN TRUMP CRACKDOWN
The two men were arrested on Feb. 5 in Augusta, Me., after an attempted ATM jackpotting robbery. (Photo by Robert Alexander/Getty Images)
Jackpotting proceeds are typically distributed amongst the gang’s members and associates to conceal its derivation, according to the court documents.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The members are often told to split the proceeds from a jackpot operation with 50% earmarked and sent to gang leadership in Venezuela and 50% divided among the individuals conducting ground operations.
Read the full article from Here
Boston, MA
Red Sox insider hints Boston may have Pablo Sandoval problem with Masataka Yoshida
The Boston Red Sox were expected to have a busy offseason to build on their short 2025 playoff appearance, their first in four seasons. Boston delivered, albeit not in the way many reporters and fans expected — Alex Bregman left and no one was traded from the outfield surplus.
Roster construction questions have loomed over the Red Sox since last season. They were emphasized by Masataka Yoshida’s return from surgery rehab and Roman Anthony’s arrival to the big leagues. Boston has four-six outfielders, depending where it envisions Yoshida and Kristian Campbell playing, and a designated hitter spot it likes to keep flexible — moving an outfielder makes the most sense to solve this quandary.
The best case-scenario for addressing the packed outfield would be to find a trade suitor for Yoshida, which has proven difficult-to-impossible over his first three seasons with the Red Sox. Red Sox insiders Chris Cotillo and Sean McAdam of MassLive think Boston may have to make an extremely difficult decision to free up Yoshida’s roster spot.
“You wonder, at what point does this become a — not Patrick Sandoval situation — but a Pablo Sandoval, where you rip the Band-Aid off and just release,” McAdam theorized on the “Fenway Rundown” podcast (subscription required).
Red Sox insiders wonder if/when Boston will release Masataka Yoshida, as it did with Pablo Sandoval in 2017
Pablo Sandoval is infamous among Red Sox fans. He signed a five-year, $90 million deal before the 2015 season and he only lasted two and a half years before the Red Sox cut him loose. His tenure was marked by career lows at the plate, injuries and a perceived lack of effort that soured things quickly with Boston. Yoshida hasn’t lived up to the expectations the Red Sox had when they signed him, but he’s no Sandoval.
McAdam postulated that the Red Sox may be waiting until there is less money remaining on Yoshida’s contract before they potentially release him. Like Sandoval, Yoshida signed a five-year, $90 million deal before the 2023 season, which has only just reached its halfway point. The Red Sox still owe him over $36 million, and by releasing him, they’d be forced to eat that money.
The amount of money remaining on Yoshida’s contract is just one obstacle that may be preventing the Red Sox from finding a trade partner to move him elsewhere. Yoshida has never played more than 140 games in a MLB season with 303 total over his three-year tenure, mostly because he’s dealt with so many injuries since moving stateside.
Maybe the Red Sox could attach a top prospect to him and eat some of his contract money to entice another team into a trade, like they already did with Jordan Hicks this winter. But that would require sacrificing a quality prospect and it would cost more money, just to move a good hitter who tries hard at his job.
There’s no easy way to fit Yoshida onto Boston’s roster, but the decision to salary dump or release him will be just as hard. Yoshida hasn’t been a bad player for the Red Sox and he doesn’t deserve the Sandoval treatment, but his trade value may only decrease if he spends another year with minimal playing time. Alex Cora and Craig Breslow have a real dilemma on their hands with this roster.
Pittsburg, PA
‘It began right here in the Hill District’: Bill from Rep. Lee seeks national honor for Freedom House
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Oklahoma1 week agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Louisiana4 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology6 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making