III · D19 · 19.4
Evidence standards for AI outputs
Admissibility and reliability.
Serious · 3DocumentedNowRisk 9
Severity
3/5
Likelihood
3/5
In the hierarchy
- Part III: Governance, Power & Existential Concerns
- D19. Rights, Law & Justice
- 19.4 Due process
Virtues and principles to explore
Held as inquiry, not as a verdict.
Justice
Justice
Who is heard, who is harmed, and who decides.
Accountability
Trust
Name who holds the consequence before it is needed.
Dignity
Center principle
Every person is a protagonist, not a data point.
Starter questions
Written to probe curiosity and learning, not accusation.
- 01If we named this complication in advance, what small, reversible step would let us learn?
- 02How would we know we were getting this wrong? What would we observe, without blaming a person?
- 03What would trustworthiness look like here: what we do, what we say, and the belief others form?
- 04What would it look like if we held “Evidence standards for AI outputs” with proportion rather than alarm?
Also on this branch
Frameworks and sources
- EU AI Act — high-level summaryregulation
- Council of Europe AI Conventionregulation
- International humanitarian law (IHL)framework
The body of law that governs the conduct of armed conflict and the protection of people who are not fighting, which applies to AI used in or for conflict.
Writing and incidents
Open indexes first. Then, if you wish, ask Grok to search the live web for this concern — one request, cached for the rest of this session.
Rights, remedies, and what the law still cannot see.