We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Alan B. Davidson
Former NTIA administrator, attorney
We set out to answer an important question: If we want responsible innovation and trustworthy AI, how do we hold AI systems — and the entities and individuals that develop, deploy, and use them — accountable? How do we ensure that they are doing what they say? For example, if an AI system claims to keep data private, or operate securely, or avoid biased outcomes – how do we ensure those claims are true?
The Report calls for improved transparency into AI systems, independent evaluations, and consequences for imposing risks. One key recommendation: The government ought to require independent audits of the highest-risk AI systems – such as those that directly impact physical safety or health, for example.
AI Verified
source
(2024)
Policy proposals and claims
Verification History
AI Verified
Quote authorship and content verified via web search. Alan Davidson (then NTIA Administrator) testified on AI accountability in 2024, and the NTIA AI Accountability Policy Report explicitly calls for 'improved transparency into AI systems, independent evaluations, and consequences', recommending that 'the government ought to require independent audits of the highest-risk AI systems'. Multiple secondary sources (Nextgov, FedScoop, Axios, MeriTalk, Govinfosecurity) corroborate verbatim phrasing. NTIA URL returns 403 to WebFetch but content matches search-result excerpts. 'For' vote on 'Mandate third-party audits for major AI systems' aligns precisely with Davidson's position. Year is 2024; Davidson has since left NTIA (current author_biography correctly says 'Former NTIA administrator'), so retaining this authoritative testimony rather than substituting.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 8d ago
replying to Alan B. Davidson