I’m not sure I understand. (Place your bets now!)
Prediction markets have made uncertainty itself a tradable asset
The history of prediction markets can be traced back to Francis Galton’s ox and Kenneth Arrow’s promise. But their recent stratospheric rise is reliant on our polycrisis era. Bets can be made on elections, interest rates and war. More uncertainty leads to more disagreement, more trading and larger markets. Chirantan Chatterjee explains what this reveals about the world.
Citizenship requires us to keep an eye on government…
Judge sides with creators of banned ICE trackers who allege DHS and DOJ violated their First Amendment rights
A judge has granted the makers of the "ICE Sightings - Chicagoland" Facebook group and the Eyes Up app a preliminary injunction to stop the Trump administration from coercing platforms to take these projects down. Judge Jorge L. Alonso of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois found that the plaintiffs, Kassandra Rosado and Kreisau Group, are likely to succeed in their case, which alleges that the government suppressed protected speech under the First Amendment by strong-arming Facebook and Apple into removing ICE monitoring efforts.
Both Eyes Up and ICE Sightings - Chicagoland use publicly available information to keep tabs on ICE activity. But after pressure from Trump officials, they were removed from Apple's App Store and Facebook, respectively.
Figure out your responsibility.
Algorithmic Incompetence: The Fiduciary Duty Your Board Is Already Breaching
Whoever exercises a function affecting third parties cannot delegate judgment to a system they neither understand nor supervise.
A pillow in the wrong hands suffocates; in the right hands, it supports. Roberto Cingolani's metaphor captures what corporate law has always known: responsibility lies not with the instrument but with whoever adopts it without understanding its implications.
In boardrooms across Europe and North America, a quiet abdication is underway. Boards are adopting algorithmic systems they do not understand, delegating comprehension to opaque technologies, and assuming that regulatory grace periods exempt them from thinking. They are wrong. The duty to understand what you govern is not a novelty of the AI Act — it is an ancient obligation that artificial intelligence now renders inescapable.
Modern war.
Artificial Intelligence in Future Warfare: Ethical Frameworks and the Regulation of Lethal Autonomous Weapons
The integration of artificial intelligence into weapons systems has compressed the decision cycle of lethal engagement from hours to milliseconds, outpacing the international legal and ethical frameworks designed to constrain state violence. This paper surveys the landscape of deployed and tested lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS), analyzes the adequacy of existing international law relative to current AI capabilities, and proposes a regulatory structure calibrated to the actual risk profile of autonomous lethality. We examine nine real-world systems -- from the Kargu-2's documented autonomous engagement in Libya (2020) to Israel's "Lavender" AI targeting in Gaza (2023-2024) and the ongoing 2026 Iran-US-Israel conflict "Operation Epic Fury," the largest AI-assisted warfare campaign in recorded history -- and classify each using a three-tier autonomy model: human-in-the-loop (HITL), human-on-the-loop (HOTL), and human-out-of-the-loop (HOOTL). Our gap analysis of the Geneva Conventions, the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), and International Humanitarian Law (IHL) identifies four critical regulatory failures: the absence of a binding definition of "meaningful human control," an accountability vacuum when LAWS cause civilian casualties, a speed asymmetry between AI warfare timescales and legal review processes, and the dual-use nature of civilian AI technologies. To address these gaps, we propose a five-tier governance framework scaling regulatory stringency with the product of autonomy level and lethality threshold. The framework carries direct implications for stalled UN CCW Group of Governmental Experts negotiations, offering a technically grounded basis for legally binding distinctions that current diplomatic language lacks.
The only good terrorist is…
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6549339
Human Rights related to AI in Counterterrorism
Counterterrorism outside armed conflict increasingly relies on Artificial Intelligence (AI). States use AI notably for detecting, predicting, and responding to terrorism. Despite acclamations of States and regional organizations that AI needs to be used in compliance with international human rights law, there is still insufficient clarity on how human rights law guides and governs legality in the use of AI in counterterrorism. Accordingly, this chapter analyses the key human rights that are relevant to - and which help to determine the lawful use of - AI in counterterrorism. This concerns, notably, the right to privacy; the rights to liberty and security; the principle of non-discrimination; the right to freedom of expression; the right to freedom of peaceful assembly; and the rights to life and to freedom from ill-treatment. The chapter assesses how these rights concern the use of AI in counterterrorism by relating them to the functions of AI applications. This is achieved through analysis of international and national rules and jurisprudence that are directly or indirectly pertinent.
I thought Trump still hated Musk? Does he hate the French more?
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/18/justice-department-france-probe-exlon-musk-x.html
Justice Department refuses to assist French probe into Musk’s X, WSJ reports
The U.S. Justice Department has told French law enforcement it will not assist with efforts to investigate tech billionaire Elon Musk’s social media platform X, The Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday, citing a letter from the DOJ’s Office of International Affairs, dated Friday.
No comments:
Post a Comment