It's genuinely intriguing to consider if Article 53's transparency mandates are truly an unbreakable part of the EU AI Act, because, from a Bayesian perspective, I'd assign a ~60% probability that their practical application will become more conditional over time.
My prior belief is that while the text establishes this as a subpart, the lived reality of its application is much more fluid.
For instance, if a groundbreaking AI in medical diagnostics emerges, requiring a level of transparency that could compromise its intellectual property or security, there's a ~75% likelihood a national regulator might grant conditional leeway.
The idea of an "always present" subpart has a probability of only ~25% in the long run, given the rapid pace of AI development and the push-and-pull between regulation and innovation.