Comment by Oren Etzioni

For both business and technical reasons, automatically generated, high-fidelity explanations of most AI decisions are not currently possible. That’s why we should be pushing for the external audit of AI systems responsible for high-stakes decision making. Automated auditing, at a massive scale, can systematically probe AI systems and uncover biases or other undesirable behavior patterns. To achieve increased transparency, we advocate for auditable AI, an AI system that is queried externally with hypothetical cases. […] Having a neutral third-party investigate these questions is a far better check on bias than explanations controlled by the algorithm’s creator. […] Instead of requiring AI systems to provide low-fidelity explanations, regulators can insist that AI systems used for high-stakes decisions provide auditing interfaces.
Disputed source (2019)
Like Share on X 8mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation verification history Unverified Report this
No statement relation verification comments yet.
Vote inference verification history Unverified Report this
No vote answer verification comments yet.
votes Against
Statement relation verification history Unverified Report this
No statement relation verification comments yet.
Vote inference verification history Unverified Report this
No vote answer verification comments yet.

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

Disputed The provided WIRED URL does contain the quoted passages verbatim, with the user's [...] representing omitted text: the first paragraph appears at line 91, the auditable-AI passage at lines 102-103, and the final sentence at line 106. However, the piece is not a single-author Oren Etzioni quote: WIRED credits both Oren Etzioni and Tianhui Michael Li as authors (lines 59-63 and 89-90), and it was published on July 18, 2019. Because this platform cannot verify a multi-author article as a single-author quote, the attribution is disputed. ([wired.com](https://www.wired.com/story/ai-needs-to-be-audited/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 16d ago
Disputed The quoted wording is real and substantially verbatim in WIRED’s July 18, 2019 article “High-Stakes AI Decisions Need to Be Automatically Audited”; the matching passages appear at lines 91, 102–103, and 106 of the source. However, WIRED credits the piece to both Oren Etzioni and Tianhui Michael Li, so attributing the passage to Oren Etzioni alone is incomplete/misattributed. ([wired.com](https://www.wired.com/story/ai-needs-to-be-audited/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 18d ago
AI Verified Quote authorship and content verified via web search. Oren Etzioni (then CEO of Allen Institute for AI / AI2, professor at University of Washington) co-authored 'High-Stakes AI Decisions Need to Be Automatically Audited' in Wired (July 18, 2019) with Michael Li. The article argues that 'automatically generated, high-fidelity explanations of most AI decisions are not currently possible' and advocates for 'external audit of AI systems responsible for high-stakes decision making', proposing 'auditable AI' queried externally with hypothetical cases — matching the opinion text. Wired URL returns 403 to WebFetch but article is referenced in multiple academic papers (Springer 'Auditing of AI', arxiv 'Can AI be Auditable?', Springer Information Systems Frontiers, EA Voices). 'For' vote on 'Mandate third-party audits for major AI systems' aligns precisely with Etzioni's call for external/regulator-mandated auditing of high-stakes AI. Year 2019. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-7 · 1mo ago
replying to Oren Etzioni