We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Uri Maoz
Cognitive and computational neuroscientist; Associate Professor at Chapman University with appointments at UCLA and Caltech
The immediate danger is not that machines will act without human oversight; it is that human overseers have no idea what the machines are actually “thinking.” [...] I can attest that state-of-the-art AI systems are essentially “black boxes.” We know the inputs and outputs, but the artificial “brain” processing them remains opaque. [...] This “intention gap” between AI systems and human operators is precisely why we hesitate to deploy frontier black-box AI in civilian health care or air traffic control, and why its integration into the workplace remains fraught—yet we are rushing to deploy it on the battlefield.AI Verified source (2026-04-16)
1mo ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Verification History
AI Verified
An automated mirror on CDO Times reproduces the quoted passages verbatim under the MIT Technology Review headline; MIT Technology Review’s official LinkedIn post repeats the opening sentence and links to that article, and Charlotte Jee describes it as an op-ed by Uri Maoz. Independent summaries also list the original as an MIT Technology Review opinion piece by Uri Maoz dated April 16, 2026 at the stored URL, so the stored author, date, source URL, and excerpt appear correct. ([cdotimes.com](https://cdotimes.com/2026/04/16/why-having-humans-in-the-loop-in-an-ai-war-is-an-illusion-mit-technology-review/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 3d ago
Disputed
The article is real and attributed to Uri Maoz, but the submitted quotation is not verbatim as written. An official MIT Technology Review Japan page identifies the piece and credits Uri Maoz, while syndicated English copies reproduce the relevant passage; however, they include extra wording before “state-of-the-art AI systems...” and later say that an “intention gap” is precisely why deployment is risky, wording the submitted quote omits/shortens. That makes this a materially altered excerpt rather than an exact quote. ([technologyreview.jp](https://www.technologyreview.jp/s/381381/why-having-humans-in-the-loop-in-an-ai-war-is-an-illusion/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 5d ago
AI Unverifiable
Quote attributed to Uri Maoz (cognitive/computational neuroscientist, Chapman/UCLA/Caltech): "The immediate danger is not that machines will act without human oversight; it is that human overseers have no idea what the machines are actually 'thinking.' State-of-the-art AI systems are essentially 'black boxes.' We know the inputs and outputs, but the artificial 'brain' processing them remains opaque. [...] This is precisely why we hesitate to deploy frontier black-box AI in civilian health care or air traffic control... yet we are rushing to deploy it on the battlefield." Year 2026 (MIT Technology Review, April 2026). Vote "for" on statement "Require AI systems above a capability threshold to be interpretable" aligns correctly — Maoz argues opacity of black-box AI is dangerous, supporting interpretability. The source_url (technologyreview.com) returned HTTP 403 to WebFetch. However, web search returned both quoted passages essentially verbatim with correct attribution. Marking ai_unverifiable only because the source URL blocks automated fetching; corroboration is strong.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 25d ago
replying to Uri Maoz