Nathaniel Erskine-Smith at the Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Committee

Thanks very much.

Thank you to you both.

The last answer is a useful segue in terms of regulation that could apply more broadly. We obviously have in the GDPR algorithm explainability, and a right to explainability was referenced in some of the opening comments.

This committee has recommended a level of transparency and the ability of a regulator to look under the hood at times to assess whether that transparency has been sufficient.

Mr. Sandvig, you have expressed some skepticism about transparency, though that does appear, to me at least, to be an initial step that would apply more broadly, in the way that the next step might have to be sector specific.

I want to drill down on some of the skepticism with respect to transparency. You didn't mention algorithmic impact assessments in your opening comments. I wonder if the detailed work that is now being put into formulating AIAs is a better answer to transparency.