I disagree. There are too many organizations who want this technology for it to disappear.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/05/24/1052653/clearview-ai-data-privacy-uk/

The walls are closing in on Clearview AI

… “The company not only enables identification of those people, but effectively monitors their behaviour [New to me. Have I missed something? Bob] and offers it as a commercial service. That is unacceptable,” said John Edwards, the UK’s information commissioner, in a statement.

… Europe is working on an AI law that could ban the use of “real-time” remote biometric identification systems, such as facial recognition, in public places. The current drafting of the text restricts the use of facial recognition by law enforcement unless it is to fight serious crimes, such as terrorism or kidnappings.

(Related) Is a face match “identification” or must other steps be taken? (A face is not a name.)

https://www.insideprivacy.com/data-privacy/general-court-of-the-eu-finds-that-individual-was-unable-to-prove-that-information-published-online-constitutes-personal-data/

General Court of the EU Finds that Individual was Unable to Prove that Information Published Online Constitutes “Personal Data”

On May 4, 2022, the General Court of the EU handed down a decision that helps clarify the standard of proof required to demonstrate that information that does not identify someone by name constitutes “personal data” under EU data protection law. The court also clarifies that the burden of proof falls on the entity alleging that the information is personal data.

(Related) If not Clearview, someone...

https://www.databreaches.net/israeli-ministry-illegally-shared-biometric-images-of-millions-with-unknown-agency/

Israeli Ministry Illegally Shared Biometric Images of Millions With Unknown Agency

Josh Breiner and Bar Peleg report:

The Population and Immigration Authority illegally shared in the past seven years the facial images of millions of Israelis with an unnamed government agency.

The actions of the Interior Ministry division were disclosed in an official report published last week by Roy Friedman, the head of the Israel National Cyber Directorate’s Identity and Biometric Applications Unit.

Read more at Haaretz.

(Related) ...and not just facial recognition.

https://www.bespacific.com/how-dhs-massive-biometrics-database-will-supercharge-surveillance-and-threaten-rights/

How DHS Massive Biometrics Database Will Supercharge Surveillance and Threaten Rights

Immigration Defense Project – HART Attack: “The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is building a $6.158 billion-dollar, next-wave biometric database that will vastly expand its surveillance capabilities and supercharge the deportation system. The Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology System (HART) will collect, organize, and share invasive data on over 270 million people (including juveniles), with that number projected to grow significantly. This data will come from federal agencies including DHS and the FBI, as well as local and state police, and foreign governments. Powered by military-grade technologies, HART will aggregate and compare biometrics data including facial recognition, DNA, iris scans, fingerprints, and voice prints—most often gathered without obtaining consent or a warrant. This will allow DHS to target immigrants for surveillance, raids, arrests, detention, and deportation. HART could be used to identify people in public spaces, creating chilling consequences for people’s rights to protest, assemble, associate, and to live their daily lives. HART threatens to violate human and privacy rights at an exponential rate, particularly in Black, brown, and immigrant communities already facing discriminatory policing and surveillance. Despite the terrifying risks, HART remains a black box—shrouded in secrecy with virtually no oversight and accountability mechanisms. Although only in phase one of its development, HART has become vastly more expensive than anticipated—generating massive revenues for first, Northrop Grumman (a military contractor), and now, Veritas Capital (a billionaire private equity firm). While troubling questions over its privacy and human rights violations remain, Congress continues to fund HART, even though it has failed to meet every milestone in its government contract.

Our report explains the dangers of HART by diving into the system’s mechanics, costs, and biometric and biographic data sources. We spotlight the companies profiting from HART’s development, and the agencies, private companies, and foreign governments that will contribute to and access its data. We outline the short- and long-term civil, privacy, and human rights risks. The underlying role and impact of HART will be to turbocharge DHS’ unchecked power—to approve or deny immigration benefits, assemble target lists for ICE raids, expand the tech border wall, and to facilitate surveillance, arrests, immigrant detention and deportation. For such reasons, we call on DHS to dismantle HART. We also call on Congress to freeze funds dedicated to HART as an interim step…”

Fear the legal AI!

https://abovethelaw.com/2022/05/the-legal-consequences-of-when-who-dun-it-becomes-what-dun-it/

The Legal Consequences Of When Who Dun It Becomes What Dun It

Elementary, my dear human.

You may have already been exposed to the fear that robots will take over the profession. This, of course, is a fringe concern for now. It is hard to give serious thought to the technological singularity’s making human labor and thought obsolete when aging men who have difficulty opening Word documents still move and shake so much of the industry. Even if applications to law school are down ~10% compared to last year, its a far cry from 100%. As it stands, when pro se litigants are advised to consult a competent attorney, they usually ask around for a graduate of an accredited law school rather than Siri.

But not all fields are prepared for technological innovation, and one of them is patent law.

Isn’t this obvious?

https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-case-for-placing-ai-at-the-heart-of-digitally-robust-financial-regulation/

The case for placing AI at the heart of digitally robust financial regulation

… Thanks to digitization, regulators today have a chance to gather and analyze much more data and to see much of it in something close to real time.

The potential for peril arises from the concern that the regulators’ current technology framework lacks the capacity to synthesize the data. The irony is that this flood of information is too much for them to handle. Without digital improvements, the data fuel that financial regulators need to supervise the system will merely make them overheat.

Enter artificial intelligence.

Redefinition requires rethinking. Well, I (the non-lawyer) find it amusing…

https://abovethelaw.com/2022/05/will-fracking-advocates-and-pollutant-manufacturers-become-bedfellows-if-roe-is-overturned/

Will Fracking Advocates And Pollutant Manufacturers Become Bedfellows If Roe Is Overturned?

Oklahoma’s anti-abortion law that totally isn’t just a religious belief codified into law is the strictest abortion ban in the nation. And given that the whole separation of church and state thing isn’t enough, some folks have been decided to change strategies by playing chicken — you can define life at conception all you want, but are you actually ready for that?

•will child support start At conception

•can we take out life insurance on fetus

•can you jail a pregnant person; fetus did not commit crime or get due process

•does US citizenship start at conception

•tax credit?

•miscarriage requires death certificate

… Can a person who has suffered recurrent miscarriages in Oklahoma sue companies that introduce chemicals into the environment with a known link to miscarriages? Can we look at, say, areas around manufacturing plants where chronic infertility is higher than the general population, conclude that the polluters are to blame, and file suit? I think we should.

Tools & Techniques.

https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/24/copilot-githubs-ai-powered-coding-tool-will-become-generally-available-this-summer/

Copilot, GitHub’s AI-powered coding tool, will be free for students

Last June, Microsoft-owned GitHub and OpenAI launched Copilot, a service that provides suggestions for whole lines of code inside development environments like Microsoft Visual Studio. Available as a downloadable extension, Copilot is powered by an AI model called Codex that’s trained on billions of lines of public code to suggest additional lines of code and functions given the context of existing code. Copilot can also surface an approach or solution in response to a description of what a developer wants to accomplish (e.g. “Say hello world”), drawing on its knowledge base and current context.

While Copilot was previously available in technical preview, it’ll become generally available starting sometime this summer, Microsoft announced at Build 2022. Copilot will also be available free for students as well as “verified” open source contributors. On the latter point, GitHub said it’ll share more at a later date.

We never said you had to, but we kinda think you should…

https://www.databreaches.net/ftc-blog-the-ftc-act-creates-a-de-facto-breach-disclosure-requirement/

FTC Blog: “The FTC Act Creates a De Facto Breach Disclosure Requirement”

Joseph Lazarrotti of JacksonLewis writes:

On May 20, 2022, the Federal Trade Commission’s Team CTO and the Division of Privacy and Identity Protection published a blog post entitled, “Security Beyond Prevention: The Importance of Effective Breach Disclosures.” In the post, the FTC takes the position that in some cases there may be a de facto data breach notification requirement, despite there currently being no section of the Federal Trade Commission Act or implementing regulation imposing an express, broadly applicable data breach notification requirement. Businesses should nonetheless take this de facto rule into account as part of their incident response plans.

Read more at Workplace Privacy, Data Management & Security Report.

Assumption: Fighting crime is more important than privacy.

https://www.cpomagazine.com/data-privacy/mexican-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-warrantless-access-to-bank-data-but-strikes-down-national-registry-of-cell-phone-biometric-data/

Mexican Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Warrantless Access to Bank Data but Strikes Down National Registry of Cell Phone Biometric Data

The Supreme Court of Mexico confounded privacy advocates in recent weeks by ruling in favor of greatly expanded government access to the bank data of private citizens, but also striking down a plan for a biometric data registry for cell phone users.

Both of the propositions were based on crime issues that are currently hot topics in the country. The warrantless search measure comes as part of the current presidential administration’s campaign to rein in big companies attempting to dodge taxes and stymie money laundering by criminal cartels, while the biometric data scheme was in response to an endemic kidnapping problem that saw overall numbers drop in 2021 but violence against kidnapped migrants increase.

The finance agencies of the nation will now have automatic access to the bank data of citizens, something that previously required a court-issued search warrant.

The Supreme Court ruled that citizen’s right to privacy was secondary to the need for access to bank data to fight money laundering and tax evasion. The decision was sparked by the defense of a businessman in a tax fraud case, who argued that he should not be compelled to hand over bank data as it is private information protected by the country’s constitution.

A call for papers…

https://www.pogowasright.org/ftc-calls-for-research-presentations-for-privacycon-2022/

FTC Calls for Research Presentations for PrivacyCon 2022

The Federal Trade Commission today called for research presentations on a wide range of privacy and data security topics such as commercial surveillance and automated decision making for its annual PrivacyCon event, which will take place virtually on November 1, 2022.

PrivacyCon 2022 will bring together a diverse group of stakeholders to discuss the latest research and trends related to consumer privacy and data security. As part of this event, the FTC is seeking empirical research and demonstrations, including rigorous economic analyses, on such topics as:

• Algorithmic bias and ensuring fairness in the use of algorithms;

• Commercial surveillance including workplace monitoring, surveillance advertising, and biometric surveillance;

• Potential new remedies and approaches to improve privacy and security practices such as the deletion of algorithms or other products developed using data illegally collected from consumers; and

• Children’s and teen’s privacy risks, harms, and vulnerabilities, particularly those presented by emerging technologies.

More details on other topics and information on how to submit presentations can be found in the Call for Presentations. The deadline for submitting a presentation for PrivacyCon is July 29, 2022.

The event is free, open to the public, and will be webcast on the FTC’s website at www.ftc.gov. The agenda will be posted to the event page prior to the event.

The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition and protect and educate consumers. Learn more about consumer topics at consumer.ftc.gov, or report fraud, scams, and bad business practices at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. Follow the FTC on social media, read consumer alerts and the business blog, and sign up to get the latest FTC news and alerts.

Source: FTC

Perhaps my AI should not share it’s inventions with me? Or should I lie and claim that I invented it?

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01391-x

Artificial intelligence is breaking patent law

In 2020, a machine-learning algorithm helped researchers to develop a potent antibiotic that works against many pathogens (see Nature https://doi.org/ggm2p4; 2020 ). Artificial intelligence (AI) is also being used to aid vaccine development, drug design, materials discovery, space technology and ship design. Within a few years, numerous inventions could involve AI. This is creating one of the biggest threats patent systems have faced.

Patent law is based on the assumption that inventors are human; it currently struggles to deal with an inventor that is a machine. Courts around the world are wrestling with this problem now as patent applications naming an AI system as the inventor have been lodged in more than 100 countries1. Several groups are conducting public consultations on AI and intellectual property (IP) law, including in the United States, United Kingdom and Europe.

If courts and governments decide that AI-made inventions cannot be patented, the implications could be huge. Funders and businesses would be less incentivized to pursue useful research using AI inventors when a return on their investment could be limited. Society could miss out on the development of worthwhile and life-saving inventions.

Rather than forcing old patent laws to accommodate new technology, we propose that national governments design bespoke IP law — AI-IP — that protects AI-generated inventions. Nations should also create an international treaty to ensure that these laws follow standardized principles, and that any disputes can be resolved efficiently. Researchers need to inform both steps.

The miracle of AI…

https://thenextweb.com/news/mits-ai-cant-determine-a-persons-race-from-medical-images

No, MIT’s new AI can’t determine a person’s race from medical images

That's not how AI works

… Prediction and identification are two entirely different things. When a prediction is wrong, it’s still a prediction. When an identification is wrong, it’s a misidentification. These are important distinctions.

AI models can be fine-tuned to predict anything, even concepts that aren’t real.

Here’s an old analogy I like to pull out in these situations:

I can predict with 100% accuracy how many lemons in a lemon tree are aliens from another planet.

Because I’m the only person who can see the aliens in the lemons, I’m what you call a “database.”

I could stand there, next to your AI, and point at all the lemons that have aliens in them. The AI would try to figure out what it is about the lemons I’m pointing at that makes me think there’s aliens in them.

Eventually the AI would look at a new lemon tree and try to guess which lemons I would think have aliens in them.

If it were 70% accurate at guessing that, it would still be 0% accurate at determining which lemons have aliens in them. Because lemons don’t have aliens in them.

In other words, you can train an AI to predict anything as long as you:

• Don’t give it the option to say, “I don’t know.”

• Continue tuning the model’s parameters until it gives you the answer you want.

What could you do with an Australian drivers license?

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/05/forging-australian-drivers.html

Forging Australian Driver’s Licenses

The New South Wales digital driver’s license has multiple implementation flaws that allow for easy forgeries.

This file is encrypted using AES-256-CBC encryption combined with Base64 encoding.

A 4-digit application PIN (which gets set during the initial onboarding when a user first instals the application) is the encryption password used to protect or encrypt the licence data.

The problem here is that an attacker who has access to the encrypted licence data (whether that be through accessing a phone backup, direct access to the device or remote compromise) could easily brute-force this 4-digit PIN by using a script that would try all 10,000 combinations….

[…]

The second design flaw that is favourable for attackers is that the Digital Driver Licence data is never validated against the back-end authority which is the Service NSW API/database.

This means that the application has no native method to validate the Digital Driver Licence data that exists on the phone and thus cannot perform further actions such as warn users when this data has been modified.

As the Digital Licence is stored on the client’s device, validation should take place to ensure the local copy of the data actually matches the Digital Driver’s Licence data that was originally downloaded from the Service NSW API.

As this verification does not take place, an attacker is able to display the edited data on the Service NSW application without any preventative factors.

There’s a lot more in the blog post.

I saw this as inevitable, even though I have been waiting over 40 years for it.

https://www.cpomagazine.com/cyber-security/personal-liability-for-directors-who-disregard-cybersecurity/

Personal Liability for Directors Who Disregard Cybersecurity

In recent months, a trend has begun to emerge among plaintiffs’ lawyers seeking to file cybersecurity incident-related shareholder derivative lawsuits – attorneys are increasingly now filing claims specifically based on failures surrounding duty of oversight. In November of 2021, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed against T-Mobile USA’s board of directors, pointing to a lack of monitoring and acting upon obvious red flags. Kevin M. Lacroix excellently outlines this trend in The D&O Diary. Directors should take notice.

I can see by your face that you live in the UK...

https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/23/23137603/clearview-ai-ordered-delete-data-uk-residents-ico-fine

Clearview AI ordered to delete facial recognition data belonging to UK residents

Controversial facial recognition company Clearview AI has been ordered to delete all data belonging to UK residents by the country’s privacy watchdog, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The ICO also fined Clearview £7.5 million ($9.4 million) for failing to follow the UK’s data protection laws.

It’s the fourth time Clearview has been ordered to delete national data in this way, following similar orders and fines issued in Australia, France, and Italy.

… However, although ICO has issued a fine against Clearview and ordered the company to delete UK data, it’s unclear how this might be enforced if Clearview has no business or customers in the country to sanction. In response to a similar deletion order and fine issued in Italy under EU law earlier this year, Clearview’s CEO Hoan Ton-That responded that the US-based company was simply not subject to EU legislation. We’ve reached out to both the ICO and Clearview for further clarity on these points.

More intrusive than I had imagined, but I guess even a simple license plate reader wants to offer more and better technology.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/meet-the-falcon-ai-powered-license-readers-multiply-as-police-tool-in-st-louis-suburbs/article_25ee76f8-836a-5610-9d0e-613be652c55c.html

Meet the Falcon: AI-powered license readers multiply as police tool in St. Louis suburbs

In the hours after Metro bus driver Jonathan Cobb was shot on Dec. 3, detectives started with a broad lead: The shooter drove a red or maroon PT Cruiser.

Cobb was shot and critically injured seemingly at random that night while ferrying a bus full of passengers in the Normandy area.

… Falcon cameras from Atlanta-based startup Flock Safety have over the past three years proliferated on area roadways. They record license plates, but also use artificial intelligence to collect what the company calls a “vehicle fingerprint” — the make, model, color and identifying features from each passing car.

In the Metro shooting case, Flock allowed police to search for every PT Cruiser matching the description that passed a growing network of Falcon cameras in the St. Louis suburbs

… Martin is among the law enforcement officials pushing for more Flock cameras in the region. He said license plate readers have been used in 75% of homicide arrests in the cooperative’s jurisdiction since 2018.

… Critics worry the databases Falcon cameras create of each passing car are invasive and ripe for abuse by police and private entities with access.

“Law enforcement will always cite stories where the tool saves the day, but I think that as citizens we have to go beyond the question: Will this ever solve crimes?” said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union who wrote a paper published in March on the spread of Flock Safety. “There’s no question that if you record everyone all the time you could solve more crimes. We could solve crimes if you let the government put cameras in everybody’s bedrooms, but we’re not willing to go there. Are we willing to let cameras change the nature of our public spaces?”

… Last month, Flock introduced the Raven, a gunshot audio detection tool that competes with ShotSpotter, which is already used to cover miles of areas with high crime rates in St. Louis and St. Louis County.

Flock says the Raven can use artificial intelligence to identify “sounds that indicate crimes in progress,” including screeching tires, the sawing of catalytic converters or the breaking of glass.

This raises another question, What other “crimes” might attract similar increases in surveillance. Entering a mosque? Registering to vote? Eating a vegan diet?

https://www.csoonline.com/article/3661689/data-protection-concerns-spike-as-states-get-ready-to-outlaw-abortion.html#tk.rss_all

Data protection concerns spike as states get ready to outlaw abortion

The use of personal data from brokers, apps, smartphones, and browsers to identify those seeking an abortion raises new data protection and privacy risks.

… Enforcement of the law will likely hinge on increased digital surveillance by authorities to more efficiently identify, arrest, and prosecute pregnant people who contemplate or seek abortions.

Resource. (I hope to improve all the way up to “Not too bad!”)

https://www.makeuseof.com/reedsy-poetry-next-level/

How Reedsy Can Help You Take Your Poetry to the Next Level

Reedsy can guide you in three key areas: understanding poetry formats, practicing the creative process, and publishing your work.

Want always comes before need?

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4112042

Ai-Powered Public Surveillance Systems: Why We (Might) Need Them and How We Want Them

In this article, we address the introduction of AI-powered surveillance systems in our society by looking at the deployment of real-time facial recognition technologies (FRT) in public spaces and public health surveillance technologies, in particular contact tracing applications. Both cases of surveillance technologies assist public authorities in the enforcement of the law by allowing the tracking of individual movements and extrapolating results towards monitoring and predicting social behavior. Therefore, they are considered as potentially useful tools in response to societal crises, such as those generated by crime and health related pandemics. To approach the assessment of the potentials and threats of such tools, we offer a framework with three dimensions: a function dimension, examines the type, quality and quantity of data the system needs to employ to work effectively; the consent dimension considers the user’s right to be informed about and reject the use of surveillance, questioning whether consent is achievable and whether the user can decide fully autonomously/independently; and a societal dimension that frames vulnerabilities and the impacts of the increased empowerment of established political regimes through new means to control populations based on data surveillance. Our analysis framework can assist public authorities in their decisions on how to design and deploy public surveillance tools in a way that enables compliance with the law while highlighting individual and societal tradeoffs.

Probably not probable?

https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol79/iss2/7/

The Computer Got It Wrong: Facial Recognition Technology and Establishing Probable Cause to Arrest

Facial recognition technology (FRT) is a popular tool among police, who use it to identify suspects using photographs or still-images from videos. The technology is far from perfect. Recent studies highlight that many FRT systems are less effective at identifying people of color, women, older people, and children. These race, gender, and age biases arise because FRT is often “trained” using non-diverse faces. As a result, police have wrongfully arrested Black men based on mistaken FRT identifications. This Note explores the intersection of facial recognition technology and probable cause to arrest.

Courts rarely, if ever, examine FRT’s role in establishing probable cause. This Note suggests a framework for how courts can evaluate FRT and probable cause. Case law about drug-sniffing dogs provides a starting point for assessing what role an FRT identification should play in probable cause determinations. But drug dogs are not a perfect analogue for FRT. Two important differences between these two policing tools warrant treating FRT with greater scrutiny than drug dogs. First, FRT has baked-in racial, gender, and age biases that drug dogs lack. Second, FRT is a digital policing tool, which recent Supreme Court precedent suggests merits more judicial scrutiny than non-digital police tools like dogs.

Giving FRT a closer look leads to the conclusion that an FRT identification alone is insufficient to establish probable cause. FRT relies on flawed inputs (non-diverse data) that leads to flawed outputs (demographic discrepancies in misidentifications). These problematic inputs and outputs provide complimentary reasons why an FRT identification alone cannot provide probable cause.

(Related)

https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.07299

Regulating Facial Processing Technologies: Tensions Between Legal and Technical Considerations in the Application of Illinois BIPA

Harms resulting from the development and deployment of facial processing technologies (FPT) have been met with increasing controversy. Several states and cities in the U.S. have banned the use of facial recognition by law enforcement and governments, but FPT are still being developed and used in a wide variety of contexts where they primarily are regulated by state biometric information privacy laws. Among these laws, the 2008 Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) has generated a significant amount of litigation. Yet, with most BIPA lawsuits reaching settlements before there have been meaningful clarifications of relevant technical intricacies and legal definitions, there remains a great degree of uncertainty as to how exactly this law applies to FPT. What we have found through applications of BIPA in FPT litigation so far, however, points to potential disconnects between technical and legal communities. This paper analyzes what we know based on BIPA court proceedings and highlights these points of tension: areas where the technical operationalization of BIPA may create unintended and undesirable incentives for FPT development, as well as areas where BIPA litigation can bring to light the limitations of solely technical methods in achieving legal privacy values. These factors are relevant for (i) reasoning about biometric information privacy laws as a governing mechanism for FPT, (ii) assessing the potential harms of FPT, and (iii) providing incentives for the mitigation of these harms. By illuminating these considerations, we hope to empower courts and lawmakers to take a more nuanced approach to regulating FPT and developers to better understand privacy values in the current U.S. legal landscape.

This is a scary App…

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9773277

A Mental Trespass? Unveiling Truth, Exposing Thoughts and Threatening Civil Liberties with Non-Invasive AI Lie Detection

Imagine an app on your phone or computer that can tell if you are being dishonest, just by processing affective features of your facial expressions, body movements, and voice People could ask about your political preferences, your sexual orientation, and immediately determine which of your responses are honest and which are not. In this paper we argue why artificial intelligence-based, non-invasive lie detection technologies are likely to experience a rapid advancement in the coming years, and that it would be irresponsible to wait any longer before discussing their implications. To understand the perspective of a “reasonable” person, we conducted a survey of 129 individuals, and identified accuracy and consent as the critical factors. In our analysis, we distinguish two types of lie detection technologies: “truth metering” and “thought exposing.” We generally find that truth metering is already largely within the scope of existing US federal and state laws, albeit with some notable exceptions. In contrast, we find that current regulation of thought exposing technologies is ambiguous and inadequate to safeguard civil liberties. In order to rectify these shortcomings, we introduce the legal concept of “mental trespass” and use this concept as the basis for proposed legislation.

Convinced it will, or afraid it will?

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/05/21/milley-tells-west-point-cadets-technology-will-transform-war.html

Milley Tells West Point Cadets Technology Will Transform War

The top U.S. military officer challenged the next generation of Army soldiers on Saturday to prepare America's military to fight future wars that may look little like the wars of today.

Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, painted a grim picture of a world that is becoming more unstable, with great powers intent on changing the global order. He told graduating cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point that they will bear the responsibility to make sure America is ready.

(Related)

https://warontherocks.com/2022/05/is-artificial-intelligence-made-in-humanitys-image-lessons-for-an-ai-military-education/

IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MADE IN HUMANITY’S IMAGE? LESSONS FOR AN AI MILITARY EDUCATION

Artificial intelligence is not like us. For all of AI’s diverse applications, human intelligence is not at risk of losing its most distinctive characteristics to its artificial creations.

Yet, when AI applications are brought to bear on matters of national security, they are often subjected to an anthropomorphizing tendency that inappropriately associates human intellectual abilities with AI-enabled machines. A rigorous AI military education should recognize that this anthropomorphizing is irrational and problematic, reflecting a poor understanding of both human and artificial intelligence. The most effective way to mitigate this anthropomorphic bias is through engagement with the study of human cognition — cognitive science.

(Related)

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109202

Aspects of Realizing (Meaningful) Human Control: A Legal Perspective

The concept of ‘meaningful human control’ (MHC) has progressively emerged as a key frame of reference to conceptualize the difficulties posed by military applications of artificial intelligence (AI), and to identify solutions to mitigate these challenges. At the same time, this notion remains relatively indeterminate and difficult to operationalize. If MHC is to support the existing framework of international law applicable to military AI, it needs to be clarified in order to deal with the challenges of AI broadly construed, not limited to ‘autonomous weapons systems’ (AWS). This chapter seeks to refine the notion of MHC by exploring its nature and purpose, and reflecting on how MHC relates to core concepts of human agency and responsibility. Building on this analysis, we propose ways to operationalize MHC, in particular by putting greater emphasis on pre-deployment stages. A legal ‘compliance by design’ approach is advanced by the authors as a means to address the complex realities when military decision-making processes are mediated by AI-enabled technologies.