Sign in

David Broniatowski

@broniatowski.bsky.social
2.2K followers 54 following 145 posts

Professor at The George Washington University in Engineering Management and Systems Engineering.

PostsRepliesMedia
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 02/09/2026
The NSF TRAILS Institute at GWU is hiring 2-year Postdocs in Washington, DC! Work with faculty on AI sensemaking, metrics for trust in AI, participatory design, & local/state/federal AI governance. Jointly led by GWU, UMD, Morgan State & Cornell. Apply here: www.gwu.jobs/postings/128...
gwu.jobs
Postdoctoral Associate
GW has everything you need to succeed in discovery. Outstanding research, state-of-the-art facilities and world-class faculty support discovery and innovative solutions. Researchers and faculty across...
010
Reposted by David Broniatowski
gwiddp.bsky.social @gwiddp.bsky.social · 08/06/2026
A recent paper by IDDP researchers unpacks “trustworthy AI” in a way that helps explain why so many debates in this space feel misaligned. A 🧵 (1/6) @broniatowski.bsky.social and @lorien-abroms.bsky.social
rdcu.be
The epistemologies of trust: conflicting worldviews in the “Trustworthy AI” discourse
111
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
So maybe the question isn’t: “How do we build trustworthy AI?” But: “Which definition of trust are we operating within?”
media.tenor.com
a man in a red jacket is making a stop sign with his hand
ALT: a man in a red jacket is making a stop sign with his hand
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
The deeper challenge isn’t just technical or political. It’s cognitive. People shift between these perspectives depending on context—often without realizing it.
media.tenor.com
a man wearing glasses and a black turtleneck is holding something in his hands and making a funny face .
ALT: a man wearing glasses and a black turtleneck is holding something in his hands and making a funny face .
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
The implication: there is no single solution to “trustworthy AI.” Different problems → different responses: • Poor performance → better benchmarks • Loss of agency → redesign systems • Weak oversight → audits & regulation • Power concentration → structural reform
media.tenor.com
a hand giving an okay sign with the words ohh caiste below it
ALT: a hand giving an okay sign with the words ohh caiste below it
130
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
That’s not a bug. It’s what makes coordination possible. But it also means debates about AI governance often start from misalignment.
media.tenor.com
a cartoon dog is sitting at a table with a cup of coffee in front of a fire with the words this is fine .
ALT: a cartoon dog is sitting at a table with a cup of coffee in front of a fire with the words this is fine .
120
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
One way to make sense of this: treat “trust” as a boundary object. A shared term that different groups interpret differently—while assuming alignment.
media.tenor.com
a cartoon of spongebob and patrick with the word boundaries
ALT: a cartoon of spongebob and patrick with the word boundaries
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
So when organizations say they’re building “trustworthy AI,” they’re often talking past each other. Same term. Different meanings.
media.tenor.com
a man is sitting at a table with a glass of wine making a funny face .
ALT: a man is sitting at a table with a glass of wine making a funny face .
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
These perspectives don’t just differ—they conflict. Improving metrics doesn’t solve power imbalances. Regulation doesn’t guarantee agency. Better UX can even increase manipulation risks.
media.tenor.com
a man in a suit with a red tie and a pocket square that says ' i ' on it
ALT: a man in a suit with a red tie and a pocket square that says ' i ' on it
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
In our paper, we identify four distinct ways people think about trust in AI: • Trust as performance (metrics) • Trust as relationship (agency, norms) • Trust as institutions (regulation, auditing) • Trust as power (or the lack of it) Paper: rdcu.be/feRMf
media.tenor.com
a cartoon character is wearing a conical hat and the number four is written on it .
ALT: a cartoon character is wearing a conical hat and the number four is written on it .
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
The problem isn’t just technical. It’s conceptual. Different communities are using the same word—“trust”—to mean very different things.
media.tenor.com
a cartoon of two spidermans standing in front of a nypd van
ALT: a cartoon of two spidermans standing in front of a nypd van
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/04/2026
Everyone says they want “trustworthy AI.” But almost no one agrees on what that actually means. This substack post summarizes our new paper (link to paper below): open.substack.com/pub/davidabr...
open.substack.com
Why “Trustworthy AI” Means Different Things to Different People
The four perspectives shaping design, risk, and governance
110
Reposted by David Broniatowski
gwiddp.bsky.social @gwiddp.bsky.social · 17/03/2026
New @techpolicypress.bsky.social article by @broniatowski.bsky.social & Joseph Simons encourage policymakers to think of large scale digital platforms as critical infrastructure. Policy debates surrounding these platforms narrowly focus on access controls or legal liability. Read at bit.ly/4bzYjDr.
bit.ly
A Building Code for Digital Infrastructures
We should treat large social and AI systems like critical infrastructure and adopt "building codes" for them, write David A. Broniatowski and Joseph Simons.
012
Reposted by David Broniatowski
Tech Policy Press @techpolicypress.bsky.social · 16/03/2026
We should treat large social and AI systems like critical infrastructure and adopt "building codes" for them, write David A. Broniatowski and Joseph Simons. Building codes are not suggestions; they are the baseline that ensures a structure is fit for its intended use, they write.
techpolicy.press
A Building Code for Digital Infrastructures
We should treat large social and AI systems like critical infrastructure and adopt "building codes" for them, write David A. Broniatowski and Joseph Simons.
0175
Reposted by David Broniatowski
Joe Bak-Coleman @jbakcoleman.bsky.social · 21/01/2026
Some reflections by @broniatowski.bsky.social on our preprint and some of the discussion around what constitutes a conflict of interest in @kakape.bsky.social's write-up. A few thoughts and reflections below 🧪 broniatowski.substack.com/p/when-is-a-...
Screen shot of the following text: 

One of the striking things about the reaction to this preprint is how often it treats disclosure standards as if they must be invented from scratch.

They don’t.

In biomedicine, where the stakes are unmistakably high, disclosure norms are not casual, and they are not left to intuition. The ICMJE guidelines—used by most major medical journals—define conflicts of interest broadly: not only employment and direct funding, but advisory roles, collaborations, and other relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence judgment.

Under those standards, many of the ties identified in this preprint would straightforwardly qualify as conflicts that should be disclosed.

And we don’t find this strange in medicine.

We would not blink at the claim that co-authoring with a tobacco company scientist is a disclosable relationship when writing about tobacco control. Even if the specific paper was not funded by Philip Morris. Even if the collaborator is methodologically impeccable. Even if the conclusions are sound.
171
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
We don’t need louder certainty. We need clearer responsibility — and institutions willing to bear the consequences of restoring legitimacy.
010
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
Standing up for science shouldn’t mean asking science to rule. It should mean insisting that science not be used as political cover — and not be sacrificed when that cover fails.
110
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
That path is less satisfying emotionally. It offers fewer villains and no quick moral wins. But it’s how trust is rebuilt without turning science into a faction.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
The harder path is insisting on answerability: clear separation between advising and deciding, visible ownership of decisions by political leaders, and honest acknowledgment of value tradeoffs.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
If we frame accountability primarily as purification — who belongs, who is beyond the pale — we risk deepening the legitimacy crisis we’re trying to solve.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
But history is clear: removal never cleanly restores legitimacy. It provokes backlash, rebellion, and renewed challenges to authority. Institutions have to be prepared to absorb that — not pretend it won’t happen.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
Sometimes legitimacy does require removing bad actors from positions of authority. Avoiding that conversation isn’t realistic.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
Anthropologist Mary Douglas suggested that when procedural authority weakens, groups compensate by tightening identity and policing boundaries. That move can feel stabilizing — but it accelerates polarization, purity tests, and endorsement of conspiracy theories.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
But there’s a risk here. Activism shifts authority from process to moral identity: trust us because we are on the right side.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
This is where activism enters — understandably. When institutions fail, moral clarity feels like the only thing left to stand on.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
When decisions inevitably went wrong under uncertainty, science became the fall guy — not because it lied, but because responsibility had been misallocated.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
Politics has parties, elections, leadership turnover. Science doesn’t. In the blame economy, that asymmetry matters.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
Experts stepped in to help. That was understandable. But science is built to advise, not to decide — and it lacks the institutional machinery to absorb blame when decisions go badly.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
During COVID, scientists didn’t seize power. Political leaders delegated it — often publicly — because they were unwilling or unable to make hard, value-laden decisions themselves.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
But I think we need to ask a harder question: what kind of authority are we actually defending when we defend “science”?
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
I want to start with agreement: there has been real harm, real misinformation, and real bad faith from people in power. Silence was never a neutral option.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
This is a thread for people who care deeply about science and democracy — especially those who feel the pull toward “standing up for science” in a moment of real institutional failure (longer version at this substack: substack.com/home/post/p-...).
substack.com
When Authority Slips
What Moses Can Teach Science About Legitimacy
121
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 22/12/2025
🔥🔥🔥🔥|🔥|🔥🔥🔥🔥
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 21/12/2025
But here’s the hard part: removing a person often doesn’t fix the underlying problem, especially if the problem is how decisions get made, not just who made them.
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 21/12/2025
When institutions lose trust, people naturally look for someone to blame. Calling for removal, impeachment, or expulsion can feel like the only way to signal “this isn’t okay.” That reaction is understandable.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 21/12/2025
What I’m struggling with—and what I think many of you are struggling with too—is how to push back without making the long-term problem worse.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 21/12/2025
I want to be clear about my own position first. Criticism and accountability are necessary. I don’t support the actions of politicians who make their name by promoting misinformation.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 21/12/2025
_ 🔥🔥🔥|🔥|🔥🔥🔥🔥
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 19/12/2025
_ _ 🔥🔥|🔥|🔥🔥🔥🔥
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 19/12/2025
_ _ _🔥|🔥|🔥🔥🔥🔥
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 18/12/2025
_ _ _ _ |🔥|🔥🔥🔥🔥
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 17/12/2025
_ _ _ _ |🔥|_ 🔥 🔥 🔥
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 16/12/2025
_ _ _ _ |🔥|_ _ 🔥 🔥
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 15/12/2025
Looking forward to reading this piece! She's on to something...
030
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 15/12/2025
_ _ _ _ |🔥|_ _ _ 🔥
010
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 12/12/2025
But as long as humans prefer simple, meaningful gists over decontextualized detail, engagement-maximizing systems will amplify those gists—about politics, vaccines, or our own minds. We can’t turn off that cognitive machinery. We can decide which gists we want it to amplify.
000
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 12/12/2025
Giving teens tools to understand how their feeds are shaping meaning may matter more than toggling parental controls. This doesn’t let platforms off the hook for engagement incentives.
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 12/12/2025
• Injecting alternative, evidence-based gists into the same narrative register • Helping users distinguish normal distress from clinical conditions • Explaining limits of self-diagnosis and paths to real help—briefly, clearly, meaningfully It also means rethinking “interpretability.”
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 12/12/2025
If we want to address the rabbit hole, interventions have to operate at the level of gist, not just moderation or screen-time limits. That means:
100
David Broniatowski @broniatowski.bsky.social · 12/12/2025
1️⃣ Short-form video is optimized for gist 2️⃣ Adolescents gravitate toward content that explains how they feel 3️⃣ Algorithms reinforce meanings, not just keywords 4️⃣ Warning labels flag risk but don’t reshape interpretation
100