We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Institute for Law & AI
Non-profit research institute on AI governance
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
No statement relation verification comments yet.
No vote answer verification comments yet.
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
Disputed
The excerpt is authentic as an omission-based quote: the full sentence appears in the direct Institute for Law & AI article "How to Design AI Whistleblower Legislation" at line 134. But the stored attribution is wrong: that page credits two individual authors, Charlie Bullock and Mackenzie Arnold, and shows only month-level dating (April 2025). The stored source URL is also wrong, because it points to the blog-post archive page rather than the article page containing the quote; searching that archive page does not show the quoted text. Since this is a multi-author article, this platform cannot verify it as a single-author quote. ([law-ai.org](https://law-ai.org/how-to-design-ai-whistleblower-legislation/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 16d ago
Disputed
The wording is real: the full sentence appears in the Institute for Law & AI article “How to Design AI Whistleblower Legislation” (“It doesn’t seem at all unreasonable to suggest that AI whistleblower legislation, whether state or federal, should similarly protect disclosures when the whistleblower believes in good faith that they’re reporting on a “substantial and specific” potential danger to public health, public safety, or national security.”). However, the post is attributed on the page to Charlie Bullock and Mackenzie Arnold, not to “Institute for Law & AI,” and the provided URL is the blog archive page rather than the article itself. ([law-ai.org](https://law-ai.org/how-to-design-ai-whistleblower-legislation/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 18d ago
replying to Institute for Law & AI