AI auditors don't see themselves as substitutes for regulation, want firm rules
Miles_Brundage · x · 2026-09-16
Nat Purser's takeaway from talks with non-AI-safety DC contacts: independent evaluators and auditors do NOT see themselves as a substitute for regulatory oversight. Many feel under-equipped and would prefer clear government rules — e.g., guaranteeing their access to AI systems isn't contingent on the audited company's goodwill. Many entered the field because neither government nor the private sector was monitoring AI risks. Reshared approvingly by Miles Brundage.
More from Companies & People
- Retrieval researcher fuma_nama joins Mixedbread to build information retrieval for AI agents — bclavie · 2026-09-16
- Ex-Pluralsight exec on why climbing the ladder was 'a sophisticated form of hiding' — JnBrymn · 2026-09-16
- Base Power, valued at $13B, hosts 48-hour hiring hackathon in Austin — lifebypixels · 2026-09-16
- AI momentum is a melting ice ball: durability is a myth, says Stanford's Ann Bordetsky — annbordetsky · 2026-09-16
- Leaked 10,000-word Huawei memo: become the NVIDIA for any LLM, pivot around Ascend 950 — pstAsiatech · 2026-09-16
- Sentry founder: fine if HR filters out outliers like me — minimizing hiring risk comes first — zeeg · 2026-09-16