Panel discusses third-party validation approach
Menin asks how government can improve transparency and who should be the third-party validators. Coxon says whoever is competent and qualified, and notes the need for preemptive safety cases judged by evaluators.
Okay.
So one of the frustrations, certainly, that I think everyone has is that for these safety incidents, it is not as if the companies have been self-reporting them.
We are finding out sometimes months after the fact.
So whether it was what happened with Hugging Face, whether it was what happened with the government of Australia, how can we have additional transparency, as each of you have testified?
What measures can we as government take?
Obviously, we want to do third-party validation.
Mr.
Turner, I appreciate your comments to make some changes to that bill.
We want to make sure that the third-party validators are free from conflict of interest as it provides in the bill.
Who should be the third-party validators?
I'll start with you.
Mr.
Coxon.
Whoever is competent and qualified to do the evaluation.
I do think as well as after incidents, we will need preemptive safety cases that are judged by evaluators as well.