Could any evaluation of an attack happen before the attack.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15027570.2025.2569130
Robocop Reimagined: Harnessing the Power of AI for LOAC Compliance
This article is intended as a contribution to the growing literature on the potential benefits of military applications of AI to ensure compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict. Drawing on foundational notions of the philosophy of mind and legal philosophy, the article proposes the introduction of a secondary LOAC-compliance software, the “e-JAG”, in order to police the results offered by primary targeting software, while at the same time remaining always under human control, as what can overall be considered a positive redundancy in the sense of being an additional guard rail to strengthen the precautions in attack that militaries are legally obligated to implement.
Perhaps we are not ready for an automated legal system.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5585290
Law, Justice, and Artificial Intelligence
Judges, physicians, human resources managers, and other decision-makers often face a tension between adhering to rules and taking into account the specific circumstances of the case at hand. Increasingly, such decisions are supported by—and soon may even be made by—artificial intelligence, including large language models (LLMs). How LLMs resolve these tensions is therefore of paramount importance.
Specifically, little is known about how LLMs navigate the tension between applying legal rules and accounting for justice. This study compares the decisions of GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 4, and Gemini 2.5 Flash with those of laypersons and legal professionals, including judges, across six vignette-based experiments comprising about 50,000 decisions.
We find that, unlike humans, LLMs do not balance law and equity: when instructed to follow the law, they largely ignore justice in both their decisions and reasoning; when instructed to decide based on justice, they disregard legal rules. Moreover, in contrast to humans, requiring reasons or providing precedents has little effect on their responses. Prompting LLMs to consider litigant sympathy, or asking them to predict judicial decisions rather than make them, somewhat reduce their formalism, but they remain far more rigid than humans.
Beyond their formalism, LLMs exhibit far less variability ("noise") than humans. While greater consistency is generally a virtue in decision-making, the article discusses its shortcomings as well. The study introduces a methodology for evaluating current and future LLMs where no demonstrably single correct answer exists.
Prosecuting the Terminator?
https://www.pzhfars.ir/article_231761_en.html?lang=fa
Civil Liability for Robots and Artificial Intelligence: Legal Challenges and Solutions in the Age of New Technologies
New technologies, especially robots and artificial intelligence, have created extensive transformations in social, economic, and industrial life. However, the rapid development of these technologies has created numerous challenges in the field of civil liability, which traditional legal systems cannot easily adapt to. The main question is how to explain and regulate civil liability arising from damages or injuries attributed to robots and artificial intelligence systems based on current civil law. This research aims to investigate the legal challenges of civil liability for robots and artificial intelligence and to provide innovative legal solutions. The research method was descriptive-analytical and comparative, and the topic was analyzed by reviewing legal sources, international documents, and comparative studies. The research findings show that ambiguities related to determining the culprit, proving fault, and direct liability of robots are among the most important legal issues in this field and require the development of specific rules and regulations based on the characteristics of intelligent technologies. The innovation aspect of this research is in providing a comparative framework and proposing native solutions appropriate to technological developments and the country's legal system. Finally, to guarantee the rights of individuals and protect the public interest, it is necessary to amend and update civil liability laws, and legal and judicial institutions must do their utmost in this regard.
Searching for evidence of a specific crime or anything that look suspicious?
Amazon's Ring Cameras Push Deeper Into Police and Government Surveillance
Less than two years after removing a feature that made it easier for law enforcement agencies to request footage from owners of Ring doorbells and other security products, Amazon has partnered with two companies that will help facilitate the same kinds of requests.
Two weeks after rolling out a new product line for 2025, Ring, owned by Amazon, announced a partnership with Flock Safety, as part of its expansion of the Community Requests feature in the Ring Neighbors app. Atlanta-based Flock is a police technology company that sells surveillance technology, including drones, license-plate reading systems and other tools. The announcement follows a partnership Ring entered into with Axon, previously Taser International, which also builds tools for police and military applications.
