Hi Brian, On Fri, Jun 5, 2026 at 2:44 PM Brian E Carpenter < [email protected]> wrote:
> > Nothing in any version of the draft suggests changing anything, except > requiring disclosure. I don't really understand why that is regarded as > undesirable or onerous. There is indeed a lot of FUD as well as valid > concern about AI usage these days but I don't think a disclosure > requirement contributes to either of those. I am curious to what intent or productive purpose there is in making disclosure a “requirement”? If it’s merely “truth in advertising” then I would leave it off. Ironically, I stumbled across the IETF 88 Technical Plenary recently thanks to the YT algorithm and (correct me if I’m wrong but) it seems to me that many, many documents struggle with Security Considerations despite many good reasons for it to be a requirement. Also a requirement might suggest some form of related community enforcement may be necessary or implied, and that also sounds like an opportunity for an unfalsifiable mess. Cheers, Nathanael >
-- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
