“Cut power to data centers” is one form of a kill switch that would be difficult for an AI to circumvent, and I think there are a number of possible scenarios where AI can ‘go rogue’ and begin causing widespread harm, short of something like Skynet. Regardless, do you think there is a better approach (or that a law is not appropriate)?

I don't think a law is inappropriate, and cutting power to a data center is a fair example. But that isn't what this bill does. It requires companies to be able to stop inference, cut off user access and throttle compute allocation. Those are all things they already do to run their own services. Nothing in it touches the grid, and nothing in it reaches open weight models at all.

My concern is with what the government gets, not with what the companies have to build.

There is a provision requiring companies to be able to suspend an account or a user that the Secretary identifies as a risk, and that includes a risk of violating the company's own terms of service. Once an incident has happened somewhere, DHS can order it. The order takes effect immediately, asking them to reconsider does not pause it, they get five days to answer, and after that you are filing in the DC Circuit. What gets reported along the way is exempt from FOIA and from state open records law.

To be frank I worry about mankind and its lust for power more than I worry about the AI. History has not been kind to people who assumed emergency powers would stay narrow or get handed back.