Dr. Sasha Rubel:

I thank the Senator for the question. We have been very vocal in our support for risk-based approaches to AI regulation that are use-case specific and work backwards from the risk but that are also interoperable and build on initiatives like international standards, the OECD principles or the G7 code of conduct under discussion to ensure that innovators - in Ireland, for example - have a clear pathway to introduce their innovations at scale, not only in places like France and Germany but also in Canada. There is quite a bit of remaining work on secondary legislation. There is a need to engage various stakeholders to ensure not only that compliance obligations are technically feasible but also that they are interoperable so EU innovators can remain competitive in a very fast-moving environment.

There is a common misconception that companies are waiting to be regulated in order to do the right thing. All the companies here today have decided that just because something is technologically feasible does not mean it should be built. We are proactively deciding what we should build based on our responsible AI principles but we are also putting in place, even before regulation comes into effect, initiatives that adhere to various principles, such as transparency obligations. One of the key transversal obligations in the EU AI Act concerns transparency. Let me give an example in this regard. Our AI model service card, which is responsible AI documentation, provides customers with information on what acceptable use is, the kind of data used to train the models and the design choices that have been made concerning how a model has been fine-tuned or should be used. There are many initiatives we have taken as a company that pre-empt compliance obligations that will come into effect, because we know this is the right thing to do.