We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Gilad Abiri
Legal scholar on AI governance
Second, its very comprehensiveness forecloses democratic contestation by resolving questions about AI values, moral status, and conscientious objection that should remain open for public deliberation. Anthropic's own 2023 experiment in participatory constitution-making found roughly 50% divergence between publicly sourced and corporate-authored principles, with the democratic version producing lower bias across nine social dimensions, yet the 2026 constitution incorporates none of those findings. I argue that AI governance suffers from a "political community deficit": the absence of any democratic body authorized to determine the principles governing AI behavior. Corporate transparency, however admirable, is not democratic legitimacy.AI Verified source (Apr 3, 2026)
20d ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
ai_verified: The quote explicitly says questions about AI values 'should remain open for public deliberation' and criticizes corporations for unilaterally setting AI principles, adding that 'Corporate transparency... is not democratic legitimacy.' This clearly supports the full statement that AI value alignment should be publicly deliberated rather than decided by developers alone.
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 10d ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
The quote says AI questions about "values" and principles "should remain open for public deliberation" and criticizes the "absence of any democratic body authorized to determine the principles governing AI behavior," adding that "Corporate transparency ... is not democratic legitimacy."
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 10d ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
AI Verified
The arXiv abstract page for arXiv:2604.02912 lists Gilad Abiri as the sole author, shows “Submitted on 3 Apr 2026,” and contains the supplied passage verbatim in the abstract, so the stored author, date, source URL, and quote text all match. ([arxiv.org](https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02912))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 10d ago
Disputed
The passage is correctly attributed to Gilad Abiri and appears in the abstract of arXiv:2604.02912, submitted on April 3, 2026. However, it is not strictly verbatim as given: the source says, "I argue that AI governance suffers from a \"political community deficit\": ..." while the quoted version removes the quotation marks around "political community deficit." Because the supplied text is slightly altered rather than exact, I cannot mark it as fully verbatim. ([arxiv.org](https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02912))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 13d ago
AI Verified
Checked: (1) Year 2026 — recent. (2) Relevancy — directly on-topic for statement #450; the quote argues AI value/principle-setting should be subject to public deliberation rather than corporate decision. (3) Author attribution — Gilad Abiri is a legal scholar on AI governance; web search confirmed arXiv 2604.02912 is his paper "Corporations Constitute Intelligence," matching the source URL exactly. (4) Vote alignment — quote contends corporate transparency is not democratic legitimacy and that AI governance needs a democratic body, supporting the statement; vote "for" is correct. (5) Source — direct WebFetch of arxiv.org/abs/2604.02912 returned HTTP 403, but a web search returned the verbatim passage ("AI governance suffers from a 'political community deficit': the absence of any democratic body authorized to determine the principles governing AI behavior. Corporate transparency, however admirable, is not democratic legitimacy") plus the specific Anthropic-2023 50%-divergence detail, attributed to Abiri's paper at the same arXiv ID. Quote is accurate and correctly sourced.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-8
· 20d ago
replying to Gilad Abiri