Monday, July 1, 2024

The Disturbing Footnote in Supreme Court’s Trump Immunity Ruling; The New Republic, July 1, 2024

Edith Olmsted, The New Republic ; The Disturbing Footnote in Supreme Court’s Trump Immunity Ruling

"While the Department of Justice has long held that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted, the Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on the issue—until now. In one brief footnote of his majority opinion granting sweeping protections to the president, Chief Justice John Roberts reaffirmed the department’s rule.

“Our decision in Clinton permitted claims alleging unofficial acts to proceed against the sitting President,” he wrote, referring to Clinton v. Jones, a civil suit brought against former President Bill Clinton over conduct from before he was president. “In the criminal context, however, the Justice Department ‘has long recognized’ that ‘the separation of powers precludes the criminal prosecution of a sitting President.’”"

Trump v. United States; U.S. Supreme Court, July 1, 2024

 U.S. Supreme Court; Trump v. United States

The Trump Decision Reveals Deep Rot in the System; The New York Times, July 1, 2024

Laurence H. Tribe, The New York Times ; The Trump Decision Reveals Deep Rot in the System

"The American people can still vote this November to reject what would be a devastating blow to the survival of government by and for the people. But whatever one believes about the likely outcome, we can and should also begin talk of amending the Constitution to repair these structural flaws. Whether Trumpism implodes later rather than sooner, we must remember that over the course of our history, we have made progress toward a “more perfect Union” only by imagining a better future and struggling to embody it in our fundamental law. Sometimes we’ve amended the Constitution after a national upheaval as convulsive as the Civil War. At other times, however, less traumatic events affecting the presidency, in particular, have prompted constitutional reform.

To repair the profound and growing problem of presidential unaccountability, we must dare to design a separate branch of government, outside the existing three, charged with investigating and prosecuting violations of federal criminal laws."

The Supreme Court Gives a Free Pass to Trump and Future Presidents; The New York Times, July 1, 2024

The Editorial Board , The New York Times; The Supreme Court Gives a Free Pass to Trump and Future Presidents

"As of Monday, the bedrock principle that no one is above the law has been set aside. In the very week that the nation celebrates its founding, the court undermined the reason for the American Revolution by giving presidents what one dissenting justice called a “law-free zone” in which to act, taking a step toward restoring the monarchy that the Declaration of Independence rejected."

The Supreme Court’s Immunity Ruling is a Victory for Donald Trump; The New Yorker, July 1, 2024

, The New Yorker; The Supreme Court’s Immunity Ruling is a Victory for Donald Trump

"The conservative majority answered their alarm with sarcasm, dismissiveness, and, perhaps most disturbingly, glorification of the personage of the President—swooning about a “vigorous” and “energetic” executive while warning of the dangers of one who is “feeble.” (Those words, in light of Biden’s debate struggles, might provoke a range of painful reflections.) Roberts wrote, of the dissents, “They strike a tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the Court actually does today.” He’s wrong about that. The Court went further than it would have needed to, even if the goal was simply shielding Trump from Jack Smith."

Thomas and Alito took part in the case, despite calls for their recusal.; The New York Times, July 1, 2024

Adam Liptak, The New York Times ; Thomas and Alito took part in the case, despite calls for their recusal.

"Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., rejecting calls for their disqualification, participated in the decision on the scope of former President Donald J. Trump’s immunity from prosecution.

Experts in legal ethics have said that the activities of the justices’ wives raised serious questions about their impartiality."

Supreme Court delivers big win for Trump on immunity: 5 takeaways; The Hill, July 1, 2024

REBECCA BEITSCH AND ZACH SCHONFELD , The Hill; Supreme Court delivers big win for Trump on immunity: 5 takeaways

"The majority’s decision provides a broad shield to former presidents for their conduct while in the White House."

Trump immunity case: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have substantial protection from prosecution; Fox News, July 1, 2024

 Brooke Singman , Brianna Herlihy, Fox News; Trump immunity case: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have substantial protection from prosecution

"The Supreme Court ruled Monday in Trump v. United States that a former president has substantial immunity from prosecution for official acts committed while in office, but not for unofficial acts.

In a 6-3 decision, the Court sent the matter back down to a lower court, as the justices did not apply the ruling to whether or not former President Trump is immune from prosecution regarding actions related to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

"The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority...

In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, former President Trump said, "I have been harassed by the Democrat Party, Joe Biden, Obama and their thugs, fascists and communists for years, and now the courts have spoken." 

"This is a big win for our Constitution and for democracy. Now I am free to campaign like anyone else. We are leading in every poll—by a lot—and we will make America great again," he said."

Historians, legal experts express dismay at Trump immunity ruling; The Roll Call, July 1, 2024

 Ryan Tarinelli, The Roll Call; Historians, legal experts express dismay at Trump immunity ruling

"Historians and legal experts warned Monday that the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling opens the door to dangerous abuses of power and strikes against foundational American principles of accountability under the law...

Presidential historian and author Michael Beschloss was among those who referred to the idea that the decision cut against the intent of the nation’s founders.

“Thanks to Supreme Court today, Presidents in future will have access to far more unaccountable power than they ever have had in American history,” Beschloss posted on social media. “Founders wanted a President, not a King.”...

Asa Hutchinson, the former Arkansas governor who ran unsuccessfully in the GOP 2024 presidential primary, said the Supreme Court gave presidents greater control of the Justice Department. That’s because, Hutchinson argued, the decision says an “official act” that gets immunity includes threatening to fire the attorney general if he does not take an action.

“I can only imagine how this may be abused,” Hutchinson tweeted...

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., issued a statement that the ruling “makes perfect sense to me” because core constitutional authorities must come with absolute immunity and other official acts will be determined by factual analysis.

“The Supreme Court’s dissent in this case is foolish in every way, particularly Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson’s argument that this decision allows a president to assassinate their opponent,” Graham said. “The liberal members of the Court and the Left have lost their minds when it comes to President Trump.”...

A White House official responded to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision by noting Biden has said “nobody is above the law.”

“That is a core American principle and how our system of justice works,” spokesman Ian Sams said in an email. “We need leaders like President Biden who respect the justice system and don’t tear it down.”"

Justices 'fear for democracy' in dissent on Trump immunity; BBC News, July 1, 2024

Mike Wendling , BBC News; Justices 'fear for democracy' in dissent on Trump immunity

"Six conservative-leaning justices signed the majority opinion, but the three liberals dissented.

Led by Sonia Sotomayor, they expressed "fear for our democracy".

"Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival?" Justice Sotomayor wrote. "Immune."

"Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune."

"Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done," Justice Sotomayor wrote. "In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."

She was joined in her dissent by the court's two other liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan."

The Supreme Court’s disastrous Trump immunity decision, explained; Vox, July 1, 2024

Ian Millhiser, Vox; The Supreme Court’s disastrous Trump immunity decision, explained

"Trump v. United States is an astonishing opinion. It holds that presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution — essentially, a license to commit crimes — so long as they use the official powers of their office to do so."

Vatican conference ponders who really holds the power of AI; Religion News Service, June 27, 2024

Claire Giangravé, Religion News Service; Vatican conference ponders who really holds the power of AI

"The vice director general of Italy’s Agency for National Cybersecurity, Nunzia Ciardi, also warned at the conference of the influence held by leading AI developers.

“Artificial intelligence is made up of massive economic investments that only large superpowers can afford and through which they ensure a very important geopolitical dominance and access to the large amount of data that AI must process to produce outputs,” Ciardi said.

Participants agreed that international organizations must enforce stronger regulations for the use and advancement of AI technologies.

“You could say that we are colonized by AI, which is managed by select companies that brutally rack through our data,” she added.

“We need guardrails, because what is coming is a radical transformation that will change real and digital relations and require not only reflection but also regulation,” Benanti said.

The “Rome Call for AI Ethics,” a document signed by IBM, Microsoft, Cisco and U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization representatives, was promoted by the Vatican’s Academy for Life and lays out guidelines for promoting ethics, transparency and inclusivity in AI.

Other religious communities have also joined the “Rome Call,” including the Anglican Church and Jewish and Muslim representatives. On July 9, representatives from Eastern religions will gather for a Vatican-sponsored event to sign the “Rome Call” in Hiroshima, Japan. The location was decided to emphasize the dangerous consequences of technology when unchecked."

Public roundtable: AI and protections for use of an individual’s name, image, likeness, or reputation; United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Monday, August 5, 2024 9 AM EDT - 4:30 PM EDT

 United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO); Public roundtable: AI and protections for use of an individual’s name, image, likeness, or reputation

"The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) invites members of the public to a roundtable discussion about the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) technology and legal protections for individuals’ reputations and name, image, voice, likeness (NIL), and other indicators of identity. 

This is your opportunity to provide input on:

  • Whether existing legal protections for individuals’ NIL and reputations are sufficient
  • How these legal protections intersect with other intellectual property (IP) laws
  • How AI technology impacts existing legal protections for NIL and reputation

The feedback received will assist the USPTO’s work to develop IP policy recommendations regarding the intersection of AI and IP, in accordance with the  Executive Order on AI ssued by President Biden in October 2023.

The roundtable will consist of two sessions: A morning in-person session at USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, and an afternoon virtual session. Both sessions will be livestreamed."

Prevent An AI Disaster Like The One At McDonald’s By Serving Up Ethics; Forbes, July 1, 2024

 Bruce Weinstein, Ph.D., Forbes; Prevent An AI Disaster Like The One At McDonald’s By Serving Up Ethics

"Would you like some bacon with your ice cream? How about an order of 260 Chicken McNuggets? These are but a few of the menu mishaps that occurred after McDonald’s incorporated AI into its drive-through experience.

The comic results of this technological mishap are the stuff of late-night television shows, but the core issues are anything but funny. No company wants its promising initiatives to become fodder for comedians.

The best way for your company to prevent an AI-generated disasters like this one is to embed ethical considerations into every step of the process you use to take an idea to market.

Here are three guidelines for making sure your business doesn’t become a feature on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert’s “Meanwhile” segment."

Channeling Courage; American Libraries, June 30, 2024

Diana Panuncial , American Libraries ; Channeling Courage

"While discussing his book, Small Acts of Courage: A Legacy of Endurance and the Fight for Democracy (St. Martin’s Press, 2024)he highlighted key moments in his vast family history, shared his thoughts on book banning, and emphasized the importance of fostering immigrants in society...

Velshi noted that he chose the title of his book to “emphasize that we can save democracy in small ways, with each of us doing it, but they require a little courage.”

“I only exist because other people before me took up small acts of courage that said, ‘My responsibility is not to do my job and earn a paycheck. It is to leave the place better than I found it.’ And that should always be your responsibility,” Velshi continued. He added that librarians likely initially didn’t choose to become librarians to fight book banning, but became dedicated to advocating for intellectual freedom as a necessity: “The courage is in deciding to do that.”

Imploring librarians to remain strong in their fight against censorship, Velshi said: “Think of the individuals who become smarter, who follow an area of study, who stay alive because of books and libraries.”"

A Macon day camp introduces kids to the ethics of AI; Georgia Public Broadcasting, July 1, 2024

 

"Young children today may never know a time without AI.  So how do you teach kids to use AI effectively — and ethically? That was the focus of a June day camp for middle schoolers in Macon. GPB's Taleen Hanna has more.

“With the existing workforce, AI is going to take over so much of the customer service or tech support,” Finkelstein said. “So should we not use AI just for the sake of giving more people jobs?”

The students began to think it through out loud, but they really had no clear answer. Just getting them to think it through achieved some of Finkelstein’s aim. 

Artificial intelligence has worked its way into our everyday lives, whether we like it or not. Kids today may never know a time without AI, so how do you teach them to use it effectively and even ethically?

That question was at the heart of a day camp in June hosted at Mercer University in Macon, and spearheaded by Finkelstein."

South Carolina implements one of US’s most restrictive public school book bans; The Guardian, June 30, 2024

, The Guardian; South Carolina implements one of US’s most restrictive public school book bans

"South Carolina has implemented one of the most restrictive book ban laws in the US, enabling mass censorship in school classrooms and libraries across the state.

Drafted by Ellen Weaver, the superintendent of education and close ally of the far-right group Moms for Liberty, the law requires all reading material to be “age or developmentally appropriate”. The vague wording of the legislation – open to interpretation and deliberately inviting challenge – could see titles as classic as Romeo and Juliet completely wiped from school shelves.

South Carolina’s recent regulation is part of an alarmingly broader nationwide fight against literature exploring race, sexuality, or anything seemingly contentious or divisive. The severity of this particularly draconian law, however, sets it apart from what is happening in most other states.

The broad-reaching policy took effect automatically on 25 June despite not being debated or voted upon by the state senate or house, as the process typically necessitates."

Supreme Court Justices: Ethics, recusal and public perception; WOUB Public Media, June 28, 2024

WOUB Public Media; Supreme Court Justices: Ethics, recusal and public perception

"The U.S. Supreme Court has hit an all-time low in public trust and confidence.

In this episode of “Next Witness…Please,” retired judges Gayle Williams-Byers and Tom Hodson explore the reasons behind this decline and the immense power wielded by Supreme Court justices.

They delve into why the public sees the court as more political than judicial, eroding faith in the rule of law.

The episode also addresses shady financial dealings, unreported gifts, and questionable public actions and statements by justices, including Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

These issues raise serious ethical concerns and undermine the court’s integrity, much to the consternation of many legal analysts and ethicists.

Tune in to “Next Witness…Please” as the judges discuss potential solutions to these ethical challenges and ways the Supreme Court can restore public trust."

Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win; Ars Technica, June 21, 2024

 , Ars Technica; Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win

"As a result of book publishers successfully suing the Internet Archive (IA) last year, the free online library that strives to keep growing online access to books recently shrank by about 500,000 titles.

IA reported in a blog post this month that publishers abruptly forcing these takedowns triggered a "devastating loss" for readers who depend on IA to access books that are otherwise impossible or difficult to access.

To restore access, IA is now appealing, hoping to reverse the prior court's decision by convincing the US Court of Appeals in the Second Circuit that IA's controlled digital lending of its physical books should be considered fair use under copyright law."

Sunday, June 30, 2024

Tech companies battle content creators over use of copyrighted material to train AI models; The Canadian Press via CBC, June 30, 2024

 Anja Karadeglija , The Canadian Press via CBC; Tech companies battle content creators over use of copyrighted material to train AI models

"Canadian creators and publishers want the government to do something about the unauthorized and usually unreported use of their content to train generative artificial intelligence systems.

But AI companies maintain that using the material to train their systems doesn't violate copyright, and say limiting its use would stymie the development of AI in Canada.

The two sides are making their cases in recently published submissions to a consultation on copyright and AI being undertaken by the federal government as it considers how Canada's copyright laws should address the emergence of generative AI systems like OpenAI's ChatGPT."

Amy Dickinson says goodbye in her final column; The Washington Post, June 30, 2024

 , The Washington Post; Amy Dickinson says goodbye in her final column

"Dear Readers: Since announcing my departure from writing this syndicated column, I have heard from scores of people across various platforms, thanking me for more than two decades of offering advice and wishing me well in my “retirement.” I am very touched and grateful for this outpouring of support...

The questions raised in this space have been used as teaching tools in middle schools, memory care units, ESL classes and prisons. These are perfect venues to discuss ethical, human-size dilemmas. On my last day communicating with you in this way, I feel compelled to try to sum up my experience by offering some lasting wisdom, but I’ve got no fresh insight. Everything I know has been distilled from wisdom gathered elsewhere...

Boxer Mike Tyson famously said, “Everybody has a plan, until they get punched ...” Punches are inevitable. But I do believe I’ve learned some universal truths that might soften the blows.

They are:...

Identify, develop, or explore your core ethical and/or spiritual beliefs...

I sometimes supply “scripts” for people who have asked me for the right words to say, and so I thought I would boil these down to some of the most important statements I believe anyone can make.

They are:

I need help.

I’m sorry.

I forgive you.

I love you, just as you are.

I’m on your side.

You’re safe.

You are not alone."

THE GREAT PRETENDERS; Toronto Life, February 14, 2024

SARAH TRELEAVEN, Toronto Life; THE GREAT PRETENDERS

"The “pretendian” phenomenon in Canada can be traced back to at least the 1930s, when Archibald Stansfeld Belaney donned leathers, renamed himself Grey Owl and began telling people his mother was Apache. He used his new identity to amass fame and fortune as an Indigenous author and conservationist. But the term itself didn’t gain traction in Canada until late 2016, when Indigenous journalists started pointing out the inconsistencies in bestselling author Joseph Boyden’s proclaimed Indigenous roots. Today, it’s used to broadly describe fakers who claim to be Indigenous but aren’t. (Some Inuit also use the term “pretenduit” as a way to address the specific co-opting of their heritage and culture.)

The list of high-profile Canadians busted for faking Indigenous identities has grown alarmingly long in recent years and includes academics, judges, professors and cultural icons. In October 2021, a CBC investigation revealed that Carrie Bourassa, a University of Saskatchewan professor, had falsely claimed to be Métis, Anishinaabe and Tlingit. In 2022, media raised questions about former judge Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond’s purported Cree ancestry; she has maintained her ­Indigeneity but later lost her Order of Canada, among other awards. Last year, Memorial University removed Vianne Timmons from her role as the school’s president after a CBC report challenged her claims of Mi’kmaw heritage. And in one of the most explosive revelations to date, The Fifth Estate reported last October that 82-year-old singer and activist Buffy Sainte-Marie had lied about being a Cree survivor of the Sixties Scoop.

The problem is especially prevalent in Canadian academia, where the allure of money and status runs high. Universities have been under pressure to increase Indigenous student admissions—as of 2021, only 13 per cent of Indigenous people of working age had a university degree—and hire more Indigenous faculty. In their rush to boost their numbers, many institutions have overlooked the potential for scammers. Jean Teillet is a recently retired Métis lawyer in Vancouver who has worked on Indigenous-identity fraud cases. In the wake of the Bourassa scandal, the University of Saskatchewan hired Teillet to write a report on Indigenous-identity fraud, complete with recommendations on how to spot it. While some institutions are now introducing mechanisms to confirm membership in a recognized nation, including the presentation of official status documents, Teillet found that, for many applicants, claiming Indigeneity is as easy as ticking off a box. Universities are largely ignorant about the complexities of Indigenous identity, and they’re either too gullible or willfully blind to dubious claims."

‘They burned books, like the Nazis did 80 years ago’: Russia’s deadly attack on Ukraine’s biggest printing house; The Guardian, June 30, 2024

  , The Guardian; ‘They burned books, like the Nazis did 80 years ago’: Russia’s deadly attack on Ukraine’s biggest printing house

"Hryniuk said she did not know if the Russian military had deliberately targeted her workplace or had attempted to hit a train repair workshop next door...

In occupied areas, the Kremlin has forbidden the Ukrainian language, removed books from schools and imposed a patriotic pro-Russian curriculum. Statues of the Ukrainian poet Taras Shevchenko have been torn down. Vladimir Putin insists Ukraine does not exist. Its land, he says, is a part of “historical Russia”.

The strike on the factory wiped out 50,000 books. Among them were works of children’s literature and Ukrainian school textbooks – 40% of them were printed by Factor Druk – due to be sent to classrooms for the new September academic year...

“For me it’s so symbolic. They burned books, like the Nazis did 80 years ago. We have so many historical examples of Russia trying to kill off Ukrainian culture,” said Oleksiy Sobol, the head of the pre-press department. The Russian empire banned Ukrainian-language texts from the 17th century onwards, with follow-up edicts. Under Stalin, in the 1930s, Ukrainian poets and writers were shot – a generation known as the “executed renaissance”.

Since 2022, Russia has erased 172 libraries and nearly 2m books, according to the Ukrainian Book Institute...

Emily Finer, who heads a research team working on Ukrainian children’s literature at the University of St Andrews, called the attack a tragedy. “The priority given to publishing trauma-informed children’s books in wartime Ukraine is unprecedented,” she said. “Over 120 picture books in Ukrainian have been printed since 2022 to help children cope with their wartime experiences now and in the future.”

The strike took place a week before the Arsenal book festival, Kyiv’s biggest literary event. Many of the destroyed books were due to be sold there...

The Howard G Buffett Foundation, meanwhile, last week pledged €5.1m (£4.3m) to restore the printing house. “They can destroy books but not Ukrainian resilience and commitment,” said Buffett, the son of the billionaire US investor Warren Buffett."

Saturday, June 29, 2024

Microsoft’s AI boss thinks it’s perfectly OK to steal content if it’s on the open web; The Verge, June 28, 2024

  Sean Hollister, The Verge; Microsoft’s AI boss thinks it’s perfectly OK to steal content if it’s on the open web

"Microsoft AI boss Mustafa Suleyman incorrectly believes that the moment you publish anything on the open web, it becomes “freeware” that anyone can freely copy and use. 

When CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin asked him whether “AI companies have effectively stolen the world’s IP,” he said:

I think that with respect to content that’s already on the open web, the social contract of that content since the ‘90s has been that it is fair use. Anyone can copy it, recreate with it, reproduce with it. That has been “freeware,” if you like, that’s been the understanding...

I am not a lawyer, but even I can tell you that the moment you create a work, it’s automatically protected by copyright in the US." 

AI scientist Ray Kurzweil: ‘We are going to expand intelligence a millionfold by 2045’; The Guardian, June 29, 2024

Zoe Corbin, The Guardian; AI scientist Ray Kurzweil: ‘We are going to expand intelligence a millionfold by 2045’

"The American computer scientist and techno-optimist Ray Kurzweil is a long-serving authority on artificial intelligence (AI). His bestselling 2005 book, The Singularity Is Near, sparked imaginations with sci-fi like predictions that computers would reach human-level intelligence by 2029 and that we would merge with computers and become superhuman around 2045, which he called “the Singularity”. Now, nearly 20 years on, Kurzweil, 76, has a sequel, The Singularity Is Nearer – and some of his predictions no longer seem so wacky. Kurzweil’s day job is principal researcher and AI visionary at Google. He spoke to the Observer in his personal capacity as an author, inventor and futurist...

What of the existential risk of advanced AI systems – that they could gain unanticipated powers and seriously harm humanity? AI “godfather” Geoffrey Hinton left Google last year, in part because of such concerns, while other high-profile tech leaders such as Elon Musk have also issued warnings. Earlier this month, OpenAI and Google DeepMind workers called for greater protections for whistleblowers who raise safety concerns. 

I have a chapter on perils. I’ve been involved with trying to find the best way to move forward and I helped to develop the Asilomar AI Principles [a 2017 non-legally binding set of guidelines for responsible AI development]. We do have to be aware of the potential here and monitor what AI is doing. But just being against it is not sensible: the advantages are so profound. All the major companies are putting more effort into making sure their systems are safe and align with human values than they are into creating new advances, which is positive...

Not everyone is likely to be able to afford the technology of the future you envisage. Does technological inequality worry you? 

Being wealthy allows you to afford these technologies at an early point, but also one where they don’t work very well. When [mobile] phones were new they were very expensive and also did a terrible job. They had access to very little information and didn’t talk to the cloud. Now they are very affordable and extremely useful. About three quarters of people in the world have one. So it’s going to be the same thing here: this issue goes away over time...

The book looks in detail at AI’s job-killing potential. Should we be worried? 

Yes, and no. Certain types of jobs will be automated and people will be affected. But new capabilities also create new jobs. A job like “social media influencer” didn’t make sense, even 10 years ago. Today we have more jobs than we’ve ever had and US average personal income per hours worked is 10 times what it was 100 years ago adjusted to today’s dollars. Universal basic income will start in the 2030s, which will help cushion the harms of job disruptions. It won’t be adequate at that point but over time it will become so.

There are other alarming ways, beyond job loss, that AI is promising to transform the world: spreading disinformation, causing harm through biased algorithms and supercharging surveillance. You don’t dwell much on those… 

We do have to work through certain types of issues. We have an election coming and “deepfake” videos are a worry. I think we can actually figure out [what’s fake] but if it happens right before the election we won’t have time. On issues of bias, AI is learning from humans and humans have bias. We’re making progress but we’re not where we want to be. There are also issues around fair data use by AI that need to be sorted out via the legal process."

2024 Generative AI in Professional Services: Perceptions, Usage & Impact on the Future of Work; Thomson Reuters Institute, 2024

Thomson Reuters Institute; 2024 Generative AI in Professional Services: Perceptions, Usage & Impact on the Future of Work

"Inaccuracy, privacy worries persist -- More than half of respondents identified such worries as inaccurate responses (70%); data security (68%); privacy and confidentiality of data (62%); complying with laws and regulations (60%); and ethical and responsible usage (57%), as primary concerns for GenAI."

GenAI in focus: Understanding the latest trends and considerations; Thomson Reuters, June 27, 2024

 Thomson Reuters; GenAI in focus: Understanding the latest trends and considerations

"Legal professionals, whether they work for law firms, corporate legal departments, government, or in risk and fraud, have generally positive perceptions of generative AI (GenAI). According to the professionals surveyed in the Thomson Reuters Institute’s 2024 GenAI in Professional Services report, 85% of law firm and corporate attorneys, 77% of government legal practitioners, and 82% of corporate risk professionals believe that GenAI can be applied to industry work.  

But should it be applied? There, those positive perceptions softened a bit, with 51% of law firm respondents, 60% of corporate legal practitioners, 62% of corporate risk professionals, and 40% of government legal respondents saying yes.  

In short, professionals’ perceptions of AI include concerns and interest in its capabilities. Those concerns include the ethics of AI usage and mitigating related risksThese are important considerations. But they don’t need to keep professionals from benefiting from all that GenAI can do. Professionals can minimize many of the potential risks by becoming familiar with responsible AI practices."

The Voices of A.I. Are Telling Us a Lot; The New York Times, June 28, 2024

 Amanda Hess, The New York Times; The Voices of A.I. Are Telling Us a Lot

"Tech companies advertise their virtual assistants in terms of the services they provide. They can read you the weather report and summon you a taxi; OpenAI promises that its more advanced chatbots will be able to laugh at your jokes and sense shifts in your moods. But they also exist to make us feel more comfortable about the technology itself.

Johansson’s voice functions like a luxe security blanket thrown over the alienating aspects of A.I.-assisted interactions. “He told me that he felt that by my voicing the system, I could bridge the gap between tech companies and creatives and help consumers to feel comfortable with the seismic shift concerning humans and A.I.,” Johansson said of Sam Altman, OpenAI’s founder. “He said he felt that my voice would be comforting to people.”

It is not that Johansson’s voice sounds inherently like a robot’s. It’s that developers and filmmakers have designed their robots’ voices to ease the discomfort inherent in robot-human interactions. OpenAI has said that it wanted to cast a chatbot voice that is “approachable” and “warm” and “inspires trust.” Artificial intelligence stands accused of devastating the creative industries, guzzling energy and even threatening human life. Understandably, OpenAI wants a voice that makes people feel at ease using its products. What does artificial intelligence sound like? It sounds like crisis management."