An innovative White House attempt to engage the interested public in the development of government policy on openness and transparency is moving briskly and, so far, productively.
An initial online brainstorming session attracted over 98,000 visits and generated some 2,450 “ideas” for increasing public access to government information, over 11,000 comments on those ideas, and over 200,000 votes in favor or against them. The process threatened to become overwhelmed by the sheer number of proposals, not all of which were clearly focused or formulated, and some of which were eccentric or irrelevant (legalize marijuana!). But the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy team that is managing the process was able to distill the best suggestions into a substantive but digestible core.
The next step is an online discussion of the particular proposals that is intended to flesh them out and to convert “lofty principles into specific actions” that the executive could take, said Dr. Beth Noveck, the OSTP Deputy Chief Technology Officer for Open Government. Interested members of the public are invited and encouraged to participate in the process. To catch up on the latest developments, see the OSTP Open Government blog.
Other White House efforts to address overclassification and the spread of official controls on unclassified information have received a less enthusiastic reception. Critics (including Secrecy News) expressed concern that these initiatives may be insufficiently ambitious in conception and that they provide no formal mechanism for public input. See “Critics Blast Obama Classification Review” by Justin Rood, ABC News The Blotter, June 3, 2009.
Americans are paying too much for almost everything, because the United States has long treated its trucking industry as an artifact to be preserved rather than as an opportunity for innovation.
These ideas aim to advance the detailed policy solutions needed to foster public trust and implement fairness in the adoption of AI across diverse domains, from healthcare and government benefits to rural access, education, and worker protections.
The evidence is clear: algorithmic pay-setting is established in app-based work, and payroll/timekeeping failures show how software can produce systemic wage harm at scale
While a few states have taken steps to implement decision-making mechanisms for certain AI systems, too many leaders are simply accepting narratives about AI’s purported public benefit at face value – jumping to the “how” of AI implementation before thoroughly vetting potential systems and deciding whether they are appropriate to use at all.