Guardat en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Idioma: | |
| Publicat: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Matèries: | |
| Accés en línia: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20055225 |
| Etiquetes: |
Afegir etiqueta
Sense etiquetes, Sigues el primer a etiquetar aquest registre!
|
Taula de continguts:
- <p>Abstract<br>The CKS pattern's foundational "human-governed" commitment names three rights — to inspect, to<br>modify, and to override substrate content and orchestration rules — as exercisable at any time during<br>the substrate's existence. The commitment is architectural: the rights must be available as a property of<br>the system's design, not as a procedural promise that depends on a particular vendor, deployment, or<br>workflow (§3.3, §6.3). This note formalizes the canonical failure of that commitment at the<br>AI-infrastructure-vendor boundary. Vendor-revocable governance is the anti-pattern in which the<br>deployment's exercise of the three rights is operationally contingent on the AI infrastructure vendor's<br>continued cooperation: terms-of-service revisions, account suspensions, infrastructure modifications,<br>vendor-side configuration changes, or platform-level policy enforcement can each, at vendor discretion,<br>disable inspection, modification, or override. The rights appear architecturally exercisable but are not.<br>The note specifies the anti-pattern as four operational components, identifies seven CKS commitments<br>it violates, traces the failure mode, names the three-commitment architectural correction (substrate<br>portability per the source paper's tool-agnosticism commitment, authority-structure substrate-residence<br>per the source paper's source-of-truth commitment, governance exercisable through architectural<br>mechanisms the vendor cannot remove), distinguishes the anti-pattern from four adjacent patterns<br>commonly conflated with it, and provides an operational test with three sharpening properties.</p>