An early heads-up.
Privacy Foundation Seminar – Friday April 22 – Privacy Issues in Negotiating AI Contracts
Professor John Soma (jsoma@law.du.edu) is looking for local lawyers and business folks who are actually negotiating AI contracts.
Business as unusual.
The Ukraine/Russia information war is forcing companies to choose a side
Both Russia and Ukraine are making demands and requests of companies to help control information around their conflict. However they respond has consequences.
… “Whether tech companies want to be or not, many now have to decide what role they play in a geopolitical conflict—in some cases for the first time. Geopolitics and technology have always been linked so decisions must be based on corporate culture and values. It is not enough to stay neutral, by the way, as neutrality is still a choice and still has implications, and the world is watching,” observes John Stewart, president, Talons Ventures, and cybersecurity career executive.
The information war
CISOs across the globe are opening their emergency action plans and ensuring they are prepared for a cyberattack, supply chain disruption, and the continuity of their business. As the geopolitical landscape has adjusted, company products are assisting or preventing the combatants from achieving their goals.
Ukraine, for example, on February 28 requested Cloudflare to remove its services from their Russian customers and to block Russians and their entities from using their services. Similarly, Ukraine is asking for global assistance to engage in offensive cyber operations. One may deduce the removal of Cloudflare’s services would make their customers vulnerable to cyber threats that Cloudflare mitigates.
The European Union decided on February 28 to make all information available via the satellite facility in Madrid to Ukraine, to include information specifically in reference to Russian troop disposition. The EU commented how its relationship and decisions concerning Russia would no longer be based solely on trade.
Useful overview.
Intelligence, information warfare, cyber warfare, electronic warfare – what they are and how Russia is using them in Ukraine
In case you were ever in doubt.
https://fortune.com/2022/03/01/russia-ukraine-invasion-war-a-i-artificial-intelligence/
A.I. is on the front lines of the war in Ukraine
… Already, Ukraine has been using the Turkish-made TB2 drone, which can take off, land, and cruise autonomously, although it still relies on a human operator to decide when to drop the laser-guided bombs it carries. (The drone can also use lasers to guide artillery strikes.) Russia meanwhile has a “kamikaze” drone with some autonomous capabilities called the Lantset, which it reportedly used in Syria and could use in Ukraine. The Lantset is technically a “loitering munition” designed to attack tanks, vehicle columns, or troop concentrations. Once launched, it circles a predesignated geographic area until detecting a preselected target type. It then crashes itself into the target, detonating the warhead it carries.
Privacy is getting personal.
German court rules: CEO to be held personally liable for data privacy violations
Christoph Werkmeister reports:
In a recent German case, a court decided that a CEO was personally liable for a data privacy breach after they hired a detective to investigate possible criminal acts by the plaintiff. Given the potential risks, this case raises a number of issues for companies and their boards to consider.
This is one of a number of recent cases in Europe where the courts have dealt with the question about what is necessary for damages to be awarded under article 82 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Read more at Freshfields.com
Surveillance by any other name… (Think wireless lie detector.)
https://www.bespacific.com/googles-new-tech-can-read-your-body-language-without-cameras/
Google’s New Tech Can Read Your Body Language—Without Cameras
Wired: “What if your computer decided not to blare out a notification jingle because it noticed you weren’t sitting at your desk? What if your TV saw you leave the couch to answer the front door and paused Netflix automatically, then resumed playback when you sat back down? What if our computers took more social cues from our movements and learned to be more considerate companions? It sounds futuristic and perhaps more than a little invasive—a computer watching your every move? But it feels less creepy once you learn that these technologies don’t have to rely on a camera to see where you are and what you’re doing. Instead, they use radar. Google’s Advanced Technology and Products division—better known as ATAP, the department behind oddball projects such as a touch-sensitive denim jacket —has spent the past year exploring how computers can use radar to understand our needs or intentions and then react to us appropriately…”
Inevitable. How do they limit what this tool extracts? What determines what is related to an event and what is not?
UAH helping create AI cell phone forensics tool to help police solve mass crimes
There can be lots of forensic evidence on many people’s cell phones when a mass incident like a shooting or bombing is happens, but winnowing out the relevant material and putting it in context can be a time-consuming and tedious affair for law enforcement.
That’s why The University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH), Florida State University (FSU) and Purdue University have teamed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to help law enforcement target, extract and collate cell phone evidence related to an incident.
… The targeted forensics tool under development will not be used in any way for tracking people, Dr. Mukherjee emphasizes. Rather, it will be a tool for collecting evidence to be used in court obtained from phones voluntarily provided to law enforcement by witnesses.
AI no, animals yes?
https://www.bespacific.com/the-elephant-in-the-courtroom/
The Elephant in the Courtroom
New Yorker (paywall]: “A curious legal crusade to redefine personhood is raising profound questions about the interdependence of the animal and human kingdoms. According to the civil-law code of the state of New York, a writ of habeas corpus may be obtained by any “person” who has been illegally detained. In Bronx County, most such claims arrive on behalf of prisoners on Rikers Island. Habeas petitions are not often heard in court, which was only one reason that the case before New York Supreme Court Justice Alison Y. Tuitt—Nonhuman Rights Project v. James Breheny, et al.—was extraordinary. The subject of the petition was Happy, an Asian elephant in the Bronx Zoo. American law treats all animals as “things”—the same category as rocks or roller skates. However, if the Justice granted the habeas petition to move Happy from the zoo to a sanctuary, in the eyes of the law she would be a person. She would have rights. Humanity seems to be edging toward a radical new accommodation with the animal kingdom. In 2013, the government of India banned the capture and confinement of dolphins and orcas, because cetaceans have been proved to be sensitive and highly intelligent, and “should be seen as ‘non-human persons’” with “their own specific rights.” The governments of Hungary, Costa Rica, and Chile, among others, have issued similar restrictions, and Finland went so far as to draft a Declaration of Rights for cetaceans. In Argentina, a judge ruled that an orangutan at the Buenos Aires Eco-Park, named Sandra, was a “nonhuman person” and entitled to freedom—which, in practical terms, meant being sent to a sanctuary in Florida. The chief justice of the Islamabad High Court, in Pakistan, asserted that nonhuman animals have rights when he ordered the release of an elephant named Kaavan, along with other zoo animals, to sanctuaries; he even recommended the teaching of animal welfare in schools, as part of Islamic studies. In October, a U.S. court recognized a herd of hippopotamuses originally brought to Colombia by the drug lord Pablo Escobar as “interested persons” in a lawsuit that would prevent their extermination. The Parliament of the United Kingdom is currently weighing a bill, backed by Prime Minister Boris Johnson, that would consider the effect of government action on any sentient animal…”
No comments:
Post a Comment