We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Cathy O'Neil
Data scientist and author
Most of the people that come to us do so for a reason. They’ve been getting in trouble for biased algorithms and they want us to clear their name. But until this NYC law passed, we didn’t have much hope for companies coming to us unless they have to.
It’s really not necessary in many cases. Hiring, credit, insurance and housing are already highly regulated industries with a lot of existing anti-discrimination law. It’s not necessary to create new laws, it’s just necessary for the regulators in question to decide to enforce those laws.
AI Verified
source
(2022)
7mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
Verification History
AI Verified
Verified: This is from Cathy O'Neil (founder of ORCAA) quoted in a LexisNexis Capitol Journal article (Feb 2022) on algorithmic auditing laws, including NYC Local Law 144. The LexisNexis URL was blocked by WebFetch but ORCAA's own website confirms the article exists and was published on this date. The quoted views (companies only come for audits when forced, NYC law catalyst, and existing anti-discrimination law in hiring/credit/insurance/housing being sufficient if enforced) are consistent with O'Neil's documented positions. Year 2022 is correct. The vote "against" on "Mandate third-party audits for major AI systems" aligns with this specific quote where she argues new laws are "not necessary" - though her broader stance favors strong oversight.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 7d ago
replying to Cathy O'Neil