Don’t like that law? There’s an App for that!

https://thenextweb.com/news/proton-vpn-uk-top-app-age-verification

Proton VPN rises to top UK app charts as porn age checks kick in

Proton VPN has become the UK’s most downloaded free app, as Britons rush to bypass a new law requiring users to verify their age before accessing websites hosting adult content.

Proton VPN reported a staggering 1,400% surge in UK sign-ups almost immediately after the Online Safety Act came into effect. It is now Britain’s most downloaded free app, overtaking ChatGPT, according to Apple’s App Store rankings.

Welcome to the anti-lawyer…

https://futurism.com/chatgpt-legal-questions-court

If You've Asked ChatGPT a Legal Question, You May Have Accidentally Doomed Yourself in Court

Imagine this scenario: you're worried you may have committed a crime, so you turn to a trusted advisor — OpenAI's blockbuster ChatGPT, say — to describe what you did and get its advice.

This isn't remotely far-fetched; lots of people are already getting legal assistance from AI, on everything from divorce proceedings to parking violations. Because people are amazingly stupid, it's almost certain that people have already asked the bot for advice about enormously consequential questions about, say, murder or drug charges.

According to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, anyone's who's done so has made a massive error — because unlike a human lawyer with whom you enjoy sweeping confidentiality protections, ChatGPT conversations can be used against you in court.

At least SciFi has considered these issues.

https://www.proquest.com/openview/0495c1e86b831c212e738b45dd5f6023/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2036059

AI ACT AND THE ECHO OF ASIMOV'S LAWS OF ROBOTICS. WHEN THE LACK OF LEGAL SOURCES PUSHED THE EU TOWARDS SCIENCE FICTION

We are living in a time of rapid technological advancement, particularly in the field of AI, and more specifically, Generative AI (GAI). As GAI models increasingly permeate everyday life, the urgent need for effective regulation has become apparent. This paper explores how the EU, in its effort to fill the legislative vacuum surrounding AI, drew inspiration from unconventional sources, including science fiction literature. Specifically, it examines the extent to which Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics, though fictional, have influenced the structure and ethical principles of the EU’s AI Act. The primary objective of this study is to analyze the resonance between Asimov’s fictional ethical framework and the normative architecture of the AI Act. To achieve this, we employ a qualitative legal research methodology, using comparative textual analysis of the AI Act alongside Asimov’s literary works and relevant policy documents. The paper is grounded in the theoretical perspectives of legal pragmatism and science and technology studies, focusing on how imagined futures can shape real-world regulatory choices. Our findings suggest that the AI Act reflects key elements of Asimov’s principles, especially the emphasis on human safety, ethical use, and transparency. This highlights an instance where speculative fiction has provided a conceptual foundation for actual legislation. The paper concludes by advocating for adaptable, ethics-based regulatory approaches that can evolve alongside AI technologies, reinforcing the idea that flexible legal structures are essential in responding to the dynamic nature of AI.

Perspective.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/kagan-says-she-was-impressed-by-ai-bot-claudes-legal-analysis

Kagan Says She Was Impressed by AI Bot Claude’s Legal Analysis

US Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan found AI chatbot Claude to have conducted an excellent analysis of a complicated Constitutional dispute.

Kagan, speaking at the Ninth Circuit’s judicial conference in Monterey, Calif., said she has been following a blog by Supreme Court litigator Adam Unikowsky of Jenner & Block LLP, who has undertaken a number of experiments with AI and legal writing. In one blog last year, he asked the chatbot to analyze the high court’s divided opinions involving the Confrontation Clause, where Kagan had authored both majority and dissenting opinions.

“Claude, I thought, did an exceptional job of figuring out an extremely difficult Confrontation Clause issue, one which the court has divided on twice,” Kagan said.

Unikowsky this month published a post where he fed Anthropic PBC’s flagship Claude all of the briefs for a case he had argued last fall and asked the model to act as an attorney providing oral argument to the high court. He concluded that the bot provided better argument than he had.

No doubt everyone in law enforcement will want one of these, attached to their own databases.

https://www.bespacific.com/new-ice-mobile-app-pushes-biometric-policing-onto-american-streets/

New ICE mobile app pushes biometric policing onto American streets

BiometricUpdate.com: “U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has quietly deployed a new surveillance tool in its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) arsenal – a smartphone app known as Mobile Fortify. Designed for ICE field agents, the app enables real-time biometric identity verification using facial recognition or contactless fingerprints. Based on leaked emails reported by 404 Media, the introduction of Mobile Fortify marks a profound shift in ICE’s operational methodology of using traditional fingerprint-based stationary checks to using mobile, on-the-go biometric profiling that echoes the type of border surveillance previously confined to airports and ports of entry. Mobile Fortify was built to integrate seamlessly with multiple Department of Homeland Security (DHS) biometric systems. Agents using ICE-issued mobile devices can now photograph a subject’s face or fingerprint, triggering a near-instant biometric match against data sources that include CBP’s Traveler Verification Service and DHS’s broader Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) database which contains biometric records on over 270 million individuals. This level of portability and automation suggests a capability that is poised to extend biometric surveillance far beyond designated checkpoints and into neighborhoods, local transport hubs, and any environment in which ICE officers operate. Facial recognition, though notably less reliable than fingerprints, is nevertheless embedded in the app’s core functionality. A February 2025 DHS Inspector General audit had warned that reliance on facial recognition risked misidentification. ICE agents have been observed pointing phones at individuals in cars during protests and other domestic operations, although it remains unclear whether Mobile Fortify was active in those encounters. The presence of a “training mode” within the app’s software though suggests that ICE envisions a spectrum of deployments from casual identity checks to more deliberate urban biometric sweeps. Although ICE officials stress that biometric matching happens in real time, the underlying model appears to be automated. A mobile photo or print is captured, transmitted to a DHS server linked to identity repositories, and compared through algorithmic matching – most likely involving AI-enhanced pattern recognition.

(Related)

https://www.bespacific.com/deportation-data-project/

Deportation Data Project

Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE collects data on every person it encounters, arrests, detains, transports via flight, and deports. We post below data that ICE produced in response to several FOIA requests by multiple organizations. Crucially, in some data releases, there are linked identifiers across data types such as arrests and detainers, allowing merges that enable tracing immigrants’ pathways (anonymously) through the immigration enforcement pipeline. The identifiers are, unfortunately, different across releases, only enabling merging within a data release. See below for a description of each release. Our ICE codebook describes each data table and the fields within them.

Sounds like someone who does not understand technology. Of course it is ‘do-able’ it’s just expensive. (and not even very expensive.)

https://deadline.com/2025/07/trump-ai-action-plan-copyright-1236466617/

Donald Trump Says AI Companies Can’t Be Expected To Pay For All Copyrighted Content Used In Their Training Models: “Not Do-Able”

Donald Trump said that AI companies can’t be expected to pay for the use of copyrighted content in their systems, amid a fierce debate over the use of intellectual property in training models.

I don’t use social media. I could never get a visa…

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/07/you-shouldnt-have-make-your-social-media-public-get-visa

You Shouldn’t Have to Make Your Social Media Public to Get a Visa

The Trump administration is continuing  its  dangerous push  to surveil and suppress foreign students’ social media activity. The State Department recently announced an unprecedented new requirement that applicants for student and exchange visas must set all social media accounts to “public” for government review. The State Department also indicated that if applicants refuse to unlock their accounts or otherwise don’t maintain a social media presence, the government may interpret it as an attempt to evade the requirement or deliberately hide online activity.

Perspective.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/will-ai-think-like-humans-were-not-even-close-and-were-asking-the-wrong-question/

Will AI think like humans? We're not even close - and we're asking the wrong question

Artificial intelligence may have impressive inferencing powers, but don't count on it to have anything close to human reasoning powers anytime soon. The march to so-called artificial general intelligence (AGI), or AI capable of applying reasoning through changing tasks or environments in the same manner as humans, is still a long way off.  Large reasoning models (LRMs), while not perfect, do offer a tentative step in that direction. 

In other words, don't count on your meal-prep service robot to react appropriately to a kitchen fire or a pet jumping on the table and slurping up food. 

Should anyone use devices like this?

https://www.theverge.com/news/711621/amazon-bee-ai-wearable-acquisition

Amazon buys Bee AI wearable that listens to everything you say

… Bee makes a $49.99 Fitbit-like device that listens in on your conversations while using AI to transcribe everything that you and the people around you say, allowing it to generate personalized summaries of your days, reminders, and suggestions from within the Bee app. You can also give the device permission to access your emails, contacts, location, reminders, photos, and calendar events to help inform its AI-generated insights, as well as create a searchable history of your activities.

My colleague Victoria Song got to try out the device for herself and found that it didn’t always get things quite right. It tended to confuse real-life conversations with the TV shows, TikTok videos, music, and movies that it heard.

Oh yeah, that makes perfect sense.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/people-dont-trust-ai-but-theyre-increasingly-using-it-anyway/

People don't trust AI but they're increasingly using it anyway

… According to data first reported by Axios, ChatGPT now responds to around 2.5 billion user queries daily, with 330 million of those (roughly 13%) originating in the US. That's around 912.5 billion queries per year.

ChatGPT was also the most downloaded app in the world in April; in June, it clocked more App Store downloads than TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X combined.

Tools & Techniques.

https://news.mit.edu/2025/mit-learn-offers-whole-new-front-door-institute-0721

MIT Learn offers “a whole new front door to the Institute”

In 2001, MIT became the first higher education institution to provide educational resources for free to anyone in the world. Fast forward 24 years: The Institute has now launched a dynamic AI-enabled website for its non-degree learning opportunities, making it easier for learners around the world to discover the courses and resources available on MIT’s various learning platforms.

MIT Learn enables learners to access more than 12,700 educational resources — including introductory and advanced courses, courseware, videos, podcasts, and more — from departments across the Institute. MIT Learn is designed to seamlessly connect the existing Institute’s learning platforms in one place.

To err is human. To hallucinate is AI?

https://www.bespacific.com/generative-artificial-intelligence-and-copyright-law-4/

Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law

Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Law CRS Legal Sidebar – LSB10922, 7/18/25 – “Innovations in artificial intelligence (AI) have raised several new questions in the field of copyright law.  Generative AI programs—such as Open AI’s DALL-E and ChatGPT programs, Stability AI’s Stable Diffusion program, and Midjourney’s self-titled program—are able to generate new images, texts, and other content (or “outputs”) in response to a user’s textual or other prompts. Generative AI programs are trained to create such outputs partly by exposing them to large quantities of existing writings, photos, paintings, or other works. This Legal Sidebar explores questions that courts and the U.S. Copyright Office have confronted regarding whether generative AI outputs may be copyrighted as well as whether training and using generative AI programs may infringe copyrights in other works. Other CRS Legal Sidebars explore questions AI raises in the intellectual property fields of patents and the right of publicity…”

No encryption no privacy.

https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol108/iss2/5/

Encryption Backdoors and the Fourth Amendment

The National Security Agency (NSA) reportedly paid and pressured technology companies to trick their customers into using vulnerable encryption products. This Article examines whether any of three theories removed the Fourth Amendment’s requirement that this be reasonable. The first is that a challenge to the encryption backdoor might fail for want of a search or seizure. The Article rejects this both because the Amendment reaches some vulnerabilities apart from the searches and seizures they enable and because the creation of this vulnerability was itself a search or seizure. The second is that the role of the technology companies might have brought this backdoor within the private-search doctrine. The Article criticizes the doctrine— particularly its origins in Burdeau v. McDowell—and argues that if it ever should apply, it should not here. The last is that the customers might have waived their Fourth Amendment rights under the third-party doctrine. The Article rejects this both because the customers were not on notice of the backdoor and because historical understandings of the Amendment would not have tolerated it. The Article concludes that none of these theories removed the Amendment’s reasonableness requirement.

Yeah, we knew that.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/07/its-frighteningly-likely-many-us-courts-will-overlook-ai-errors-expert-says/

It’s “frighteningly likely” many US courts will overlook AI errors, expert says

… Fueling nightmares that AI may soon decide legal battles, a Georgia court of appeals judge, Jeff Watkins, explained why a three-judge panel vacated an order last month that appears to be the first known ruling in which a judge sided with someone seemingly relying on fake AI-generated case citations to win a legal fight.

Now, experts are warning that judges overlooking AI hallucinations in court filings could easily become commonplace, especially in the typically overwhelmed lower courts. And so far, only two states have moved to force judges to sharpen their tech competencies and adapt so they can spot AI red flags and theoretically stop disruptions to the justice system at all levels.

The recently vacated order came in a Georgia divorce dispute, where Watkins explained that the order itself was drafted by the husband's lawyer, Diana Lynch. That's a common practice in many courts, where overburdened judges historically rely on lawyers to draft orders. But that protocol today faces heightened scrutiny as lawyers and non-lawyers increasingly rely on AI to compose and research legal filings, and judges risk rubberstamping fake opinions by not carefully scrutinizing AI-generated citations.

The errant order partly relied on "two fictitious cases" to deny the wife's petition—which Watkins suggested were "possibly 'hallucinations' made up by generative-artificial intelligence"—as well as two cases that had "nothing to do" with the wife's petition.

Tools & Techniques. Take a picture of your document and output text.

https://www.yourvalley.net/stories/pdfgear-scan-finally-a-completely-free-ai-scanner-app-for-all,600756

PDFgear Scan, Finally, a Completely Free AI Scanner App for All