Re : https://www.linkedin.com/posts/chrisfongkh_aigovernance-responsibleai-airiskmanagement-ugcPost-7474641719481749505-zyW5/
You seem to point out that there's a plethora of "formats" attempting to "summarise key biases, structural components, etc." ... which has thrashed around recently as much as the trendsalad of words used to describe the model architectures, which are bring brought to market in "innovative" rushiness.
I would simply posit that fundamentally the industry has not consolidated around a standards body, that issues governance language, gounded in standardised terminology.
Example 1 : business language is a mess, but folks like Gaartner provide a "point of view"
Example 2 : Internet technologies are a mess, but IETF W3C provides a "point of view".
There is no analogue for AI.
Maybe someday, they will end up with a Artificial Intelligence Engineer Task Force and Agentic Software Consortium.
( I have an embarassingly old interest in complaining about such messes. This is the exact problem I whinged on, about the liberal arts & sciences curriculum's lack of standardised meta-language, traversal graphs, and architecture ... as an undergrad. )
No comments :
Post a Comment