Expert opinions on Transparency

Voluntary security programs can work, but only when they create real accountability. [...] Without that structure, a voluntary process could look reassuring without materially reducing risk.

According to the proposed rule, a covered US person will be required to provide quarterly reports to BIS if the US person “engages in, or plans, within six months, to engage in ‘applicable activities.’” “Applicable activities” include: “Conducting a...

The change in the EO from a 90 day to 30 day period is a game changer because it allows our AI labs to comply with the voluntary framework without delaying new model releases.

AI is reshaping public services, democratic institutions and everyday life at a pace that has outrun meaningful public input. The Data and AI Exchange was designed to show that when stakeholders are given the time and structure to deliberate seriousl...

I definitely don't think we should align it to a specific philosophical theory that is not really robust for the real world, but actually getting public input for a lot of topics is very difficult because the public has not had the time to think abou...

New York is poised to be the first government in the United States to do what Americans have been screaming for: require basic guardrails for AI safety. Developers have promised to keep us safe, and this bipartisan bill simply ensures that they keep ...

The U.S. leads when it promotes innovation and security through voluntary frameworks rather than regulation.

Large frontier developers should annually retain an independent third party to audit compliance with frontier safety requirements.

Illinois SB 315's mandatory third-party AI audit requirement creates an impossible compliance burden — there are no recognized auditing standards, certified auditors or established methodologies for frontier model safety audits. [...] Companies canno...

Cross-border AI incident infrastructure: institutional, technical, and legal arrangements that would allow national and international authorities to detect, share, and act on AI incidents and hazards together across borders. [...] Governments and ind...

You can't have accountability without transparency. Black box models are not transparent, and they don't mix well with human oversight. Either the human blindly trusts the model—or doesn't trust it at all.

We have a very natural instinct to say: we want as much interpretability as possible. One of the sci-fi worry cases is that agents start speaking in languages to each other that we don't understand. [...] I bet there are ways to define boundaries tha...

[...] principles requiring that AI be explicable are misguided. We should be deciding which decisions require explanations. Automation is still an option;

Normalizing the use of AI in our media ecosystem broadly, but certainly in our political information system, absolutely carries the risk of undermining trust and belief and the trust that is so critical in our information and our media ecosystem.

While there are many problems with this proposal, a few stand above the others and are fatal to this effort. First, the Commission lacks statutory authority to require disclosure or disclaimers on political advertisements that utilize “artificial int...

Policy and safeguards must evolve just as swiftly [...] requiring safety assurances for powerful open releases before the window for meaningful intervention closes.

I do not believe this is the best approach to protecting the public from real threats posed by the technology.

Open source models are technically exempt [...] based on the assumption that the system is sufficiently well documented to convey its potential risks.