OpenAI has released GPT-6 Astra, a new model focused on coding, computer use, long-running agentic tasks, and cybersecurity, with availability across ChatGPT, Codex, and the OpenAI API.
Google's SynthID, designed to embed imperceptible signals into AI-generated content, is adding a new Content Detection API on Google Cloud's Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, after gaining adoption by several industry players including Nvidia and OpenAI.
OpenAI will open its first Applied AI Lab outside the US in Singapore. The lab is part of a new partnership with the Ministry of Digital Development and Information.
The initiative, called OpenAI for Singapore, was announced at the ATx Summit and is backed by a commitment of more than S$300 million.
The lab will create more than 200 Singapore-based technical roles over the next few years. OpenAI said Singapore will also become one of its global hubs for forward-deployed engineers who will work with organisations on AI deployment. OpenAI said the lab’s work will be aligned with Singapore’s AI Mission priorities which include public service, finance, and digital infrastructure.
Focus on deployment and talent
The company will work with government agencies and local partners on education and workforce programmes within the Ministry of Education and GovTech. OpenAI also plans to support educators through a Singapore chapter of the OpenAI Academy, participate in the National AI Impact Programme, and run Codex for Teachers hackathons.
The partnership includes plans to work with local partners on accelerator programmes for AI-native startups in the form of workshops for micro-entrepreneurs and small businesses, covering how founders and SMEs can use AI in operations and customer service.
Chng Kai Fong, Permanent Secretary for Digital Development and Information, said Singapore’s response to AI includes growing new sectors, anchoring global frontier companies, and equipping workers with relevant skills.
Singapore updates agentic AI framework
Singapore has also updated its governance framework for agentic AI, which was launched by the Infocomm Media Development Authority at the World Economic Forum in January 2026. The framework builds on Singapore’s earlier Model AI Governance Framework for AI, introduced in 2020, and gives organisations guidance on the responsible deployment of AI agents, including measures to reduce the risks inherent in agentic AI.
IMDA has now updated the framework after seeking feedback and case studies from the industry, with the revised version following input from more than 60 organisations, including AWS, DBS, Google, and Salesforce.
The update adds guidance on risks linked to multi-agent systems, third-party agents, automation bias, and human accountability. The framework now includes more than ten case studies showing how organisations have applied its recommendations.
The case studies were contributed by Singaporean and international organisations, including Ant International, City Developments Limited, Cyber Sierra, Dayos, Google, Knovel, OCBC, PwC, Stability Solutions, Tencent, Terminal 3, Workday, X0PA, and GovTech Singapore.
Case studies show governance controls
One case study focuses on Dayos, a Singapore-headquartered enterprise AI automation company with operations in the US. Dayos built an AI-powered ticketing agent that handles internal IT requests. The agent can resolve some requests automatically and route requests to a human when needed.
Dayos used tiered risk levels to determine what actions the agent could take. Low-risk and reversible actions, like password resets, could be automated and audited biweekly, while moderate-risk actions required human approval before execution. Higher-risk actions, like permission changes with limited reversibility, were excluded from the agent’s authority.
Tencent contributed a case study on CodeBuddy, an agentic AI coding system developed by Tencent Cloud. CodeBuddy can plan, write, and deploy code through natural language instructions and can access filesystems, terminal commands, external APIs, and MCP tools.
CodeBuddy uses preset defaults and configurable permissions. Human approval is required for actions like editing files, running shell commands, making network requests, or using external tools.
The system explains complex commands in plain language before users approve them. Suspicious commands still require human approval, even if similar commands had been pre-approved.
GovTech Singapore’s case study covers the rollout of agentic coding assistants in government. The first phase was limited to GovTech employees, did not allow external tools, and was restricted to low-risk systems. GovTech developed central logging and a framework for connecting approved external tools. The agency also tested the system against potential attacks.
Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events, click here for more information.
AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.
The ceremony was scheduled. The CEOs were on the guest list. And then it wasn’t happening.
On Thursday, US President Donald Trump scrapped a planned AI executive order, which had already been delayed multiple times, citing concerns that it might erode America’s competitive edge over China.
“We’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. What he did not say was that the order had been effectively killed by the very industry it was meant to oversee.
Lobbied out in one night
According to Semafor, which first reported the backstory, the White House’s plans were halted after Elon Musk of xAI, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and venture capitalist David Sacks, who, until recently, was Trump’s AI and cryptocurrency tsar, all spoke directly with Trump between Wednesday night and Thursday morning.
The argument that landed, according to US media, citing sources, was an appeal to the “accelerationist” faction in the administration, including officials at the National Economic Council and staffers in the Vice President’s office.
The order itself was not a sweeping regulatory framework. It would have established a voluntary mechanism for AI developers to engage with federal agencies and submit advanced models for security review up to 90 days before their public release. No licensing regime. No mandatory hold periods. Voluntary.
That was apparently still too much. Trump said he postponed it “because I didn’t like certain aspects of it,” declining to specify which ones. He added that he worried it “could have been a blocker,” a telling phrase from a president who has otherwise positioned AI as a jobs and national security priority.
A vacuum with consequences
The US has yet to pass comprehensive AI legislation. What governance architecture exists has been assembled piecemeal, through executive orders, agency guidance, and voluntary agreements. Earlier this month, the federal Centre for AI Standards and Innovation announced evaluation agreements with Google DeepMind, Microsoft, and xAI, allowing the government to assess models before public availability. That programme continues regardless of Thursday’s non-signing.
But the broader picture is one of regulatory drift. In early March, the Trump administration released a National AI Legislative Framework urging Congress to preempt state-level AI laws that “impose undue burdens,” arguing for a single national standard over what it called “fifty discordant ones.” Congress has not acted on it.
The contrast with China is sharp and increasingly difficult to ignore. Beijing’s State Council issued a 2026 legislative work plan in May outlining plans to accelerate comprehensive AI legislation, deploying language on AI governance in formal planning documents for the first time. The National People’s Congress has listed AI legislation for review for the third consecutive year.
In April, Beijing issued new rules requiring AI companies to establish internal ethics review committees. China is writing rules. Washington is cancelling ceremonies.
Who shapes US AI policy
Thursday’s episode clarified something implicit for months: in the current administration, the effective veto on AI regulation sits with a small group of industry principals who have direct access to the president.
Musk, whose xAI is a direct competitor to OpenAI and Anthropic, has a structural interest in keeping the regulatory field open. Zuckerberg’s Meta has similarly positioned itself as a champion of open-source AI development. Sacks, despite having formally left his White House advisory role in March, evidently retains enough influence to shape executive action.
Separately, Semafor reports that OpenAI has secured White House backing for a parallel effort to push AI regulations at the state level, an interesting manoeuvre given that Trump’s earlier executive order threatened states that enacted AI laws the administration disliked. That the administration appears to be simultaneously discouraging state regulation and endorsing OpenAI’s state-level strategy suggests the policy coherence problem runs deeper than one postponed signing.
The China frame does real work, but in both directions
Trump’s stated reason for pulling back, protecting the US lead over China, is the same logic that has driven every major AI policy decision since he returned to office, from the H200 export licence framework to the Stargate infrastructure programme. It is also the logic that China is watching closely.
At the Trump-Xi summit in Beijing earlier this month, the two leaders agreed to launch an intergovernmental dialogue on AI, according to the Chinese Foreign Ministry. Beijing will have noted that Washington’s internal debate about even voluntary AI oversight was resolved not by policymakers, but by the companies that stand to profit most from the absence of guardrails.
In a report by the South China Morning Post, Lizzi C. Lee, a fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute’s Centre for China Analysis, noted that both the US and China are grappling with the same underlying question: where should the regulatory frontier sit for frontier AI, particularly as models become more capable of autonomous action and more relevant to cybersecurity.
“I think a separate, potentially more important race is on governance and safety: not about who has the most advanced models, but who can govern powerful AI without choking off innovation,” she said.
The same report highlighted what Kyle Chan at the Brookings Institution put it more simply: “AI safety and regulation can be done in a way that doesn’t compromise innovation.”
Neither argument was enough on Thursday. Whether it becomes enough next time, assuming there is a next time, remains unclear.
Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events, click here for more information.
AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.
Kevin Weil and Bill Peebles are leaving OpenAI as the company shuts down Sora and folds its science team, signaling a sharp pivot away from consumer moonshots toward enterprise AI.
The OpenAI CEO's new blog post responds to both an apparent attack on his home and an in-depth New Yorker profile raising questions about his trustworthiness.
OpenAI ignored three warnings that a ChatGPT user was dangerous — including its own mass-casualty flag — while he stalked and harassed his ex-girlfriend, a new lawsuit alleges.
In addition to Lightcap's new role, OpenAI CMO Kate Rouch will be stepping away from the company to focus on cancer recovery, with a plan to return when her health allows.
AI chatbots have been linked to suicides for years. Now one lawyer says they are showing up in mass casualty cases too, and the technology is moving faster than the safeguards.
The AI industry is constantly churning out news, like major acquisitions, indie developer successes, public outcry, and existentially dangerous contract negotiations.