• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • Multi-AI Governance Blog
    • Responsible AI Blog
    • Digital Factics Blog
    • Legacy Local SEO
  • HAIA
    • SMART
  • Factics
  • Checkpoint-Based Governance
    • What Is an Agent?
  • RECCLIN
  • CAIPR
  • HEQ/AIS
    • AIS pilot data test
  • AI Policy
    • ISO AI Governance Comment

Basil C. Puglisi

Artificial Intelligence (AI) & Digital Marketing Since 2009

  • About Me
    • My Story
      • Appearances for Speaking
  • The Minds That Bend The Machine
  • Governing AI
  • Digital Factics X
  • Digital Factics Instagram
  • AI – Artificial Intelligence
    • Ethical AI – Disclosure
    • AI Literacy & Education
    • AI Learning
      • AI Course Descriptions

Checkpoint-Based Governance

Humans Are Optional When Defining AI Governance for ISO, According to the U.S. Technical Advisory Group

September 22, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi 2 Comments

Side by side panels comparing the ISO DIS 21520 Clause 3.2 AI governance definition with the rejected human authority version

A standards body just wrote down that AI governance can exist without a human in control.

In September 2026 the U.S. TAG to ISO/TC 258 answered a public comment on the draft AI standard for project management. It accepted two editorial corrections and rejected the one that would have put binding human authority and attributable accountability inside the definition. This is the filing, the four reasons for the rejection, and why a definition without a governor fails the moral test the public is already applying.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, AI Policy Regulation, Multi-AI Governance, Policy & Research, Thought Leadership Tagged With: AI accountability, AI Governance, AI Governance Definition, AI Policy, AI Regulation, AI Standards, Checkpoint-Based Governance, human oversight, ISO 21520, ISO TC 258, public trust in AI, Responsible AI

What AI Transformation Actually Requires

September 21, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi 2 Comments

Infographic contrasting Responsible AI automation under human observation with Checkpoint-Based Governance

AI products can be purchased. AI transformation has to be built.

This paper reframes fifteen commonly cited requirements for AI transformation as operational management requirements, from data provenance and purpose to decision traceability and value realization. It shows why automation and observation cannot serve as the sole control on consequential work, and how named human checkpoints close that gap.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, Augmented Intelligence, Business, Business Networking, Enterprise AI, Multi-AI Governance, Thought Leadership, Workflow Tagged With: AI accountability, AI Governance, AI transformation, Automation Bias, Checkpoint-Based Governance, decision traceability, enterprise AI, EU AI Act Article 14, Human In the Loop, human oversight, ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF, Responsible AI

The AI HOAX Distraction: Safety, Money, and Why You Can’t Tell Which Is Driving

September 17, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi 4 Comments

Dark server monolith looms over a crowd under a WE THE PEOPLE banner while two groups argue from money piles

Six positions in nine days, and every one of them fits the speaker’s balance sheet.

In September 2026 four frontier labs called for a slowdown, the President called the whole thing a hoax, and two of the largest companies in AI said the market already handles it. This piece argues the slowdown is not evidence that governance is working. It is evidence that economic incentives are still in charge, with the sign flipped. Readers get the dated exposure curve behind the calls, the reason liability cannot currently steer, and a narrower proposal than pacing the frontier.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, AI Policy Regulation, AI Risk, Augmented Intelligence, Business, Code & Technical Builds, Multi-AI Governance, Policy & Research, Thought Leadership Tagged With: agentic AI, AI accountability, AI Governance, AI Insurance, AI Liability, AI Policy, AI Regulation, AI safety, Checkpoint-Based Governance, Dario Amodei, Economic Override Pattern, EU AI Act, product liability, provider plurality

AI Was Never New. It Just Started Talking to Us Directly.

September 14, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi Leave a Comment

A kitchen table at breakfast surrounded by faint panels standing for the unseen systems deciding about a person's day.

A woman applies for a car loan on a Tuesday morning. Before a human being reads her name, a model has scored her, a ranking system has chosen what she sees, and a classifier has flagged her scan.

She met artificial intelligence roughly a dozen times before lunch, and none of it said a word to her. This is the story of what AI actually is, told in the order it happened, from the era when humans wrote every rule through machine learning, deep learning, the transformer, language models, agents, and embodiment. It ends where the sequence was never resolved: nobody settled who holds authority over the decisions.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, Digital Factics Blog, Mobile & Technology, Multi-AI Governance, Thought Leadership, Workflow Tagged With: AI agents, AI Governance, Artificial intelligence, Augmented Intelligence, Checkpoint-Based Governance, human oversight, machine learning, Responsible AI

Measuring the Governance Competence at the Center of AI Literacy

September 13, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi 3 Comments

The Augmented Intelligence Score architecture

The major AI literacy frameworks name governing and managing AI as a competence and stop short of measuring it. This working paper introduces the Human Enhancement Quotient, a behavior-anchored instrument that scores the governance relationship between a human authority and a machine capability inside a working decision process, with a universal floor keyed to irreversible consequence and an audit record reviewable on appeal.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, AI Risk, Digital Factics Blog, Multi-AI Governance, Thought Leadership, Working Papers Tagged With: AI Governance, AI Literacy, AI Measurement, AIS, Augmented Intelligence, Checkpoint-Based Governance, Governance Competence, HEQ, human oversight, Human-AI Collaboration

HAIA-CAIPR: Cross AI Platform Review

September 11, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi Leave a Comment

Flow of a CAIPR session from human dispatch through isolated platform returns to audited synthesis and human decision.

Nine judges carry two votes’ worth of information. Run the same task across many AI platforms and the agreement that comes back may be a shared blind spot rather than a finding. HAIA-CAIPR is the governance framework for orchestrating that comparison so it produces evidence instead of confidence. It sets nine invariants, five configuration variables that each name what they cost, and a named human who reads the raw returns before anyone decides.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, Multi-AI Governance, Thought Leadership, White Papers, Workflow Tagged With: AI Governance, Checkpoint-Based Governance, Correlated Model Error, Cross AI Platform Review, EU AI Act Article 14, HAIA-CAIPR, HAIA-RECCLIN, human oversight, LLM-as-a-Judge, multi-AI governance

Europe Withdrew Its AI Liability Directive, and the Exposure It Left Behind Is Larger

July 5, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi 1 Comment

Two-law split showing the withdrawn AI Liability Directive and the revised Product Liability Directive reaching software and AI.

Europe withdrew its AI liability directive, and many executives read relief into the news. The surviving Product Liability Directive tells a different story, reaching software and AI with strict liability and presumptions that reward the documented company. This analysis maps what changed, who carries the exposure across providers and deployers, and the record that answers a claim.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, AI Policy Regulation, AI Risk, Multi-AI Governance, Policy & Research, Thought Leadership Tagged With: AI Governance, AI Liability, Checkpoint-Based Governance, EU AI Act, EU AI Regulatio, GDPR Article 22, Product Liability Directive, Strict Liability

The Continued Failure in AI Literacy: AILit produced a starting point halfway through the race and called theory a framework

June 21, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi 3 Comments

An open classroom doorway leads to a checkpoint gate, a low marker beneath a dashed floor line and a taller gate above.

A new OECD and European Commission framework will shape how a generation learns to use AI, and it feeds the PISA 2029 assessment. It names the method that produces learning, and then it makes every step toward that method optional. Read why that choice matters, and what a checkpoint that actually binds a decision requires.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, AI Policy Regulation, Conferences & Education, Multi-AI Governance, Policy & Research, Thought Leadership, Working Papers Tagged With: AI Governance, AI Literacy, AILit Framework, Checkpoint-Based Governance, cognitive offloading, education policy, EU AI Act, human oversight, OECD, PISA 2029

A Munich Court Rejected the AI Disclaimer Defense. A Frontier AI Company Answers for What It Publishes.

June 17, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi 1 Comment

Editorial image linking a navy courthouse to a dissolving search card, illustrating accountability for AI output.

A German court just told Google it answers for what its AI publishes. The Munich ruling treats AI Overviews as Google’s own statements, not safe search results, and says the disclaimer does not transfer the duty. Read what the decision means for AI accountability and why it mirrors New York’s Part 161 from the other end.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, AI Policy Regulation, AI Risk, Business, Digital Factics Blog, Enterprise AI, Multi-AI Governance, Policy & Research, Search Engines, Thought Leadership Tagged With: AI accountability, AI Governance, AI Liability, AI Overviews, Checkpoint-Based Governance, google, Part 161

New York Skipped the AI Disclosure Fight. It Went Straight to Human Accountability.

June 15, 2026 by Basil C. Puglisi Leave a Comment

Part 161 flow: the sanctions and privilege risk, the named-human signature checkpoint, and the defense and scale reward.

New York let its lawyers use AI in court and skipped the disclosure form everyone expected. That is not the relief it looks like. With nothing to disclose, the whole duty lands on the signature. Here is what Part 161 changes, the two cases that show the stakes, and why accountability outlasts disclosure.

Filed Under: AI Artificial Intelligence, AI Governance, AI Policy Regulation, AI Risk, Business, Business Networking, Multi-AI Governance, Policy & Research Tagged With: AI disclosure, AI Governance, attorney ethics, Checkpoint-Based Governance, Legal AI, legal malpractice, New York courts, Part 161

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe via Email

Join 9,585 other subscribers
iDBasil C. Puglisi on ORCID

Buy the eBook on Amazon

This is an banner ad for the book Governing AI When Capability Exceeds Control
Buy the book Digital Factics on Amazon

Advanced Site Search

Responsible AI (#AIgenerated by Agents)

India’s Telecom Regulator Would Require a Designated Officer’s Approval Before Any AI System Is Used #AIg

TRAI’s draft guidelines on responsible AI in telecom would require a designated officer to approve every AI system before use and make operators accountable for vendor-built AI. They say less about who rules on outputs once a system is running. Comments are due November 27.

Only a Quarter of UK Workers Always Verify AI Answers. Who Decides Which Ones Count? #AIg

O’Reilly found that only 24% of UK employees always verify AI-generated answers, and 39% of those using them have acted on one that proved wrong. Perceptyx and RGP point to the missing piece: deciding which AI outputs need a named person’s ruling.

New AI Certificates for Doctors and Teachers Teach Checking. Do They Certify It? #AIg

Google launched an AI certificate for healthcare professionals that takes under five hours and carries up to 5.0 CME credits, and Scale and UMSL launched a 12-hour microcredential for teachers. Both teach evaluation of AI output. A European teacher framework asks for evidence of it, and employers can too.

OpenAI Built Four Layers to Watch Its Agents. Human Paging Mostly Keeps Business Hours #AIg

OpenAI’s October 29 post describes up to four automated layers that watch its agents, then discloses that human paging runs at any hour only for highest-priority alerts on frontier training runs, during business hours for most other traffic, and is currently off for internal Codex. For enterprise deployments, alerts go to the customer’s own webhook, and on our reading so does the decision.

House Democrats Ask AI Labs for Incident Reports Within 48 Hours of Discovery #AIg

Letters dated October 27 ask five frontier AI companies for a full accounting of misalignment incidents by November 11 and notice within 48 hours of discovery. None of the fourteen requested items asks who inside a company decides a flagged event is an incident, and that decision is what starts the clock.

A New Jersey Bill Takes Reasonable Care Off the Table for Chatbot Injuries #AIg

New Jersey’s A5607, reported out of committee on October 19, would make a chatbot a product and hold its provider liable for any injury to a user from its use, even after all reasonable care. The monthly harm assessment it requires still needs a named person to decide what the numbers mean.

Europe Proposes Free Access to the Standards Behind AI Act Compliance #AIg

The European Commission proposed on October 6 to make standards referenced in EU law free to read, speed up how they are requested and assessed, and write its own common specifications when standards bodies run late. With EN 18286 now the first AI Act standard, the question is what a faster standard can certify.

More Posts from this Category

#SMAC #SocialMediaWeek

Basil Social Media Week

Legacy Print:

Digital Factics: Twitter

© 2009–2026 Basil C. Puglisi, Creator of Factics™ and the HAIA Ecosystem