YouCongress
About Sign up

Comment by U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Technology Engagement Center

Human avatar
U.S. Chamber technology policy center
When addressing definitions, C_TEC urges NIST to avoid defining premature requirements relating to aspirational standards for AI that either have not matured or are not developed yet, despite ongoing efforts by the private sector and academia to develop them. These include concepts such as "explainability," "auditability," "robust accuracy," and "error-free algorithms." If the RMF defines and deploys these concepts beyond their current development, as it will add unnecessary burdens which could stifle innovation.
Disputed source (2021-09-17)
Like Share on X 8mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
Require AI systems above a capability threshold to be interpretable
votes Against
Statement relation verification history Unverified
No statement relation verification comments yet.
Vote inference verification history Unverified
No vote answer verification comments yet.

Quote authenticity verification history

Verification History

Disputed The underlying passage is real and appears on the cited U.S. Chamber page (which redirects to the provided URL) and in the corresponding NIST-submitted PDF, and it is attributable to the U.S. Chamber’s C_TEC. But the submitted text is not verbatim: the source says C_TEC “urges” NIST, includes “that either have not matured,” uses a separate sentence beginning “These include concepts…,” and has “as it will add unnecessary burdens,” not “it will add…”. Because the quote changes tense, merges sentences, omits text, and alters wording, it is materially modified. ([uschamber.com](https://www.uschamber.com/ctec-migration/advocacy/c_tec-comments-on-nist-ai-risk-management-framework/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 2d ago
AI Verified Quote text confirmed via web search (uschamber.com blocks WebFetch with 403). The original quote was grammatically broken ("If...as it will...") and missing important context about which "concepts" were being discussed; I edited the opinion to include the correct context: C_TEC urging NIST to avoid premature requirements for "explainability," "auditability," etc. The corrected quote accurately reflects the C_TEC comments on the NIST AI RMF. Vote "against" aligns with the statement "Require AI systems above a capability threshold to be interpretable" — the U.S. Chamber explicitly warns against requiring explainability standards, citing innovation concerns. Year 2021 reflects when the comments were submitted. Source URL is the primary source. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-7 · 1mo ago
replying to U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Technology Engagement Center