I'd imagine most folks are concerned with the other way that discretion cuts--it also allows tenuous interpretations that are not in the spirit of the law or are based on controversial interpretations, judicial activism, etc.
As a lay person, I also object to unclear laws and processes because it's my repsonsibility to understand and follow them. How am I supposed to do that correctly if they're intentionally ambiguous?
The system isn't without flaws and unfortunately the American legal system is particularly rife with the. To stay on topic though, no 2 people will give you the same definition of "AI" and yet we're rapidly moving into the age of it.
As such the only way to regulate around it is on a "we'll know it when we see it" basis. I know HN doesn't generally care for regulations on technology but the undeniable reality is that the online space has a dramatic effect on the real world and that AI can have a dramatic effect on the online space.
As a lay person, I also object to unclear laws and processes because it's my repsonsibility to understand and follow them. How am I supposed to do that correctly if they're intentionally ambiguous?