The Department of Energy announced its “largest deregulatory effort in history.”

The Trump administration is attempting to wipe decades of efficiency standards off the books.

The US Energy Department says it’s rolling back long-standing efficiency standards for appliances, which advocates are calling a clear violation of the law. Continuing the Trump administration’s assault on federal water and energy efficiency programs, the department announced today what it’s calling its “largest deregulatory effort in history.”

The agency is trying to rollback 47 regulations it says are “burdensome and costly,” including more than a dozen efficiency standards for appliances and battery chargers.

The proposed rules target the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), which contains an anti-backsliding provision — and that the Trump administration is seemingly trying to bypass.

    • gaja@lemm.ee
      71·
      9 hours ago

      Obviously, using an AI to verify if somethingis AI is kinda bullshit, but this is what deepseek spat out:

      The list you shared does have strong AI-generated hallmarks. Here’s why it stands out as likely machine-written, and how you can spot similar outputs in the future:

      Telltale Signs This List Is AI-Generated

      1. Repetitive Phrasing – Overuse of:

        • “Rescinding [X] for [Y]”
        • “Streamlining [A] with respect to [B]”
        • “Withdrawing [Product] as a Covered [Category]”

      2. Excessive “Rescinding” Verbs – A human would vary language more (e.g., “repeal,” “abolish,” “eliminate”).

      3. Oddly Specific Yet Vague Items – Some entries sound bureaucratic but lack real-world impact (e.g., “Rescinding Test Procedures for Small Electric Motors”).

      4. Inconsistent Scope – Jumps from major energy policies (Strategic Petroleum Reserve) to trivial ones (showerhead pressure).

      5. “Unnecessary ADR Regulations” – ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is a niche term unlikely in a political deregulation push.

      6. No Partisan Signaling – A real Trump/Musk DOGE list would include culture-war items (e.g., “Ending EV mandates”) or tech-bro priorities (e.g., “Fast-tracking AI nuclear reactor approvals”).

      How to Prove It’s AI-Generated

      • Ask for Sources: A real policy list would reference laws, executive orders, or press releases.
      • Check for Recent Events: Some items (e.g., “Clean Energy Federal Building Rule”) may not exist.
      • Test for Overlap: Run a portion through an AI detector (like Originality.ai).
      • Compare to Known AI Outputs: Lists with 47-50 items are common for AI (round numbers = generation artifacts).

      If You Suspect DOGE Is Using AI for Policy

      This would be a major scandal. Next steps:

      1. Compare drafts over time—AI lists will lack edits.
      2. Check metadata (if possible) for AI tool signatures.
      3. Demand justification for each item—AI can’t explain reasoning.

      Let me know if you want help digging deeper! This is a wild (and concerning) scenario if true. 🕵️♂️

      I want to note that the AI barely comprehended the idea of a government agency DOGE existing or the idea that Trump was reelected. I had to hammer it in:

      Ah, got it—so we’re envisioning a Doge-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under a Trump 2024 victory, where Elon Musk and a bunch of 20-year-old tech bros are ruthlessly slashing bureaucracy with meme-fueled chaos.

      Here’s your **47 absurd, inefficient, or just