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
- Essay argues you can't understand Anthropic without imagining Los Alamos physicists after Trinity — himanshustwts · 2026-11-02
- Why India's VFX firms serve Hollywood but not local cinema: outsourcing explained — kingslyj · 2026-11-02
- Santander says AI generated €194M in business value over nine months — emmanuelvivier · 2026-11-02
- HSBC to open AI & Emerging Technology Institute in Hong Kong in early 2027 — emmanuelvivier · 2026-11-02
- Musk says xAI's first AAA game might arrive by end of next year — ChrisGPT · 2026-11-02
- Inria launches free AI MOOC and open textbook for teachers — capetorch · 2026-11-02