Surely they have read everything by now so only updates (edits) continue to be useful…

https://sherwood.news/tech/ai-is-mining-the-sum-of-human-knowledge-from-wikipedia-what-does-that-mean/

AI is mining the sum of human knowledge from Wikipedia. What does that mean for its future?

The meteoric rise of AI in the last few years has caused a huge demand for data on which to train its large language models. That load has fallen heavily on Wikipedia, the world’s largest repository of human knowledge, which is created by people and free to use for machines.

But the proliferation of AI tools like ChatGPT and Google AI Overview also means that there’s a disconnect now between where people are getting their information and where it comes from. In turn, Wikipedia's executives tell us that potential separation could jeopardize an entire generation of volunteer editors' engagement with Wikipedia. If volunteers aren't editing as much, the site's quality could suffer.

I wonder how many individuals purchased “reimburse all my expenses if the show is canceled” insurance?

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/taylor-swift-cancellations-deal-blow-insurers-sources-say-2024-08-09/

Taylor Swift cancellations deal blow to insurers, sources say

Insurers face millions of dollars in claims after a foiled attack forced three Taylor Swift concerts in Austria to be cancelled, though several providers will share out the hit, two people involved in insurance for her tour told Reuters.

The concerts in Vienna were cancelled this week after a planned attack at the Ernst Happel Stadium. Some 195,000 "Swifties" had been expected to attend, with many travelling from abroad for a chance to see the pop superstar.

Barracuda Music, the concert organiser, said all tickets would be refunded within 10 days. It could not immediately be reached for comment about insurance arrangements.

Swift is popular among insurers as she rarely cancels concerts, a third insurance source said. Her celebrity and success mean that most specialist event cancellation insurers in London would be involved in covering her tour, one of the sources said. The sources declined to be named, citing client confidentiality.

Working with what they’ve got.

https://pogowasright.org/new-york-ag-issues-guidance-on-website-privacy-controls/

New York AG Issues Guidance on Website Privacy Controls

Kathryn Cahoy, Libbie Canter, Natalie Dugan, and Conor Kane of Covington and Burling write:

The New York Office of Attorney General (OAG) recently published guidance for website privacy controls. Although New York does not have a comprehensive privacy law, business’ privacy-related practices and statements may be subject to New York’s consumer protection laws, which generally prohibit businesses from engaging in deceptive acts and practices. Accordingly, the OAG noted that “statements about when and how website visitors are tracked should be accurate, and privacy controls should work as described.”

Specifically, the OAG stated that representations about privacy controls must be accurate and not misleading, and companies should ensure that privacy controls work properly and as described. The OAG also cautioned against implying that visitors can opt into the use of cookies and similar technologies if that is not the case.

Read more at InsidePrivacy.

Privacy law…

https://www.bespacific.com/artificial-intelligence-impacts-on-privacy-law/

Artificial Intelligence Impacts on Privacy Law

Rand Research Published Aug 8, 2024 -“The European Union (EU)’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act is a landmark piece of legislation that lays out a detailed and wide-ranging framework for the comprehensive regulation of AI deployment in the European Union covering the development, testing, and use of AI. This is one of several reports intended to serve as succinct snapshots of a variety of interconnected subjects that are central to AI governance discussions in the United States, in the European Union, and globally. This report, which focuses on AI impacts on privacy law, is not intended to provide a comprehensive analysis but rather to spark dialogue among stakeholders on specific facets of AI governance, especially as AI applications proliferate worldwide and complex governance debates persist. Although we refrain from offering definitive recommendations, we explore a set of priority options that the United States could consider in relation to different aspects of AI governance in light of the EU AI Act.”

Solving the AI copyright kerfuffle? Hardly. Perhaps splitting the path to resolution…

https://gazette.com/arts-entertainment/pueblo-artist-seeking-copyright-protection-for-ai-generated-work/article_18c6c048-55bd-11ef-a1b4-6795abbac3ef.html

Pueblo artist seeking copyright protection for AI-generated work

… Allen contends that the copyright denial illustrates a common misconception about artificial intelligence programs.

“An AI program cannot create a piece of art of its own accord,” said Allen, who owns a tabletop game company.

“It requires human interaction. There is human authorship involved. (The Copyright Office is) not following the law, and we’re going to prove that.”

I guess it depends on what you think AI is good for…

https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-07-30/javier-mileis-government-will-monitor-social-media-with-ai-to-predict-future-crimes.html

Javier Milei’s government will monitor social media with AI to ‘predict future crimes’

The adjustment and streamlining of public agencies that President Javier Milei is driving in Argentina does not apply to the areas of security and defense. After restoring the State Intelligence Secretariat and assigning it millions of reserved funds —for which he does not have to account— the president has now created a special unit that will deal with cyberpatrolling on social media and the internet, the analysis of security cameras in real time and aerial surveillance using drones, among other things. In addition, he will use “machine learning algorithms” to “predict future crimes,” as the sci-fi writer Philip K. Dick once dreamed up, later made famous by the film Minority Report. How will Milei do all that? Through artificial intelligence, the executive announced.

Among his plans to downsize the State, President Milei has been saying that he intends to replace government workers and organizations with AI systems. The first role that he will give to this technology, however, will be an expansion of state agencies: on Monday his government created the Unit of Artificial Intelligence Applied to Security.

The new agency will report to the Ministry of Security. “It is essential to apply artificial intelligence in the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of crime and its connections,” states the resolution signed by Minister Patricia Bullrich, who cites similar developments in other countries. The belief behind the decision is that the use of AI “will significantly improve the efficiency of the different areas of the ministry and of the federal police and security forces, allowing for faster and more precise responses to threats and emergencies.”

I wonder if discovery of things that reduce the risk will result in a reduction of premiums? (You know the answer to that one.)

https://www.businessinsider.com/homeowners-insurance-nightmare-cancellation-surveillance-drone-ai-future-2024-8

Through the roof

… I take privacy and surveillance extremely seriously — so seriously that I started one of the leading think tanks on the topic, the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project. But while I study surveillance threats around the country for a living, I had no idea that my own insurance company was using my premium dollars to spy on me. Travelers not only uses aerial photography and AI to monitor its customers' roofs, but also wrote patents on the technology — nearly 50 patents actually. And it may not be the only insurer spying from the skies.

… I'm a lazy homeowner. I hate gardening, and I don't clean as often as I should. But I still take care of the essentials. Whether it's upgrading the electrical or installing a new HVAC, I try to make sure my home is safe. But to Travelers' AI, it appeared, my laziness was too big a risk to insure. Its algorithm didn't detect an issue with the foundation or a concern with a leaky pipe. Instead, as my broker revealed, the ominous threat that canceled my insurance was nothing more than moss.

 

In case you find this stuff interesting…

https://www.theverge.com/24214574/google-antitrust-search-apple-microsoft-bing-ruling-breakdown

‘There’s no price’ Microsoft could pay Apple to use Bing: all the spiciest parts of the Google antitrust ruling

… The ruling in United States v. Google is a lot to take in. Some of it was previously reported in the press over the course of the weekslong trial; but here, the judge has inadvertently compiled the trial’s greatest hits: catty quotes from executives, embarrassing internal studies, and a bunch of surprising deets about that multibillion-dollar contract that keeps Google the default search engine in Safari.

...and AI isn’t even a lawyer! (Yet)

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/ai-could-make-the-google-court-decision-moot/

AI Could Make the Google Court Decision Moot

… What this means is a tale as old as the U.S. antitrust system — that by the time the court gets around to providing its solution, the market has already solved it itself. This is one of the central problems of relying on antitrust to solve problems, as Bob Crandall of the Brookings Institution wrote back in 2000, when Microsoft, the likely winner in today’s case, was the target. As Crandall notes,

In 1969 International Business Machines was charged with monopolizing the computer industry. But whatever IBM had done to incur the Justice Department’s wrath became irrelevant in a world in which personal computers and minicomputers were making deep inroads into the “mainframe” computer business. Thirteen years later, the government simply dropped the case.

It may well be that AI does the government’s job for it, not just making the default search engine in a Web browser irrelevant but making search engines as we know them today themselves irrelevant. And we’ll likely all be better off for it.

A law to stop the tides?

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2442865-can-ai-chatbots-be-reined-in-by-a-legal-duty-to-tell-the-truth/

Can AI chatbots be reined in by a legal duty to tell the truth?

… LLM chatbots, such as ChatGPT, generate human-like responses to users’ questions, based on statistical analysis of vast amounts of text. But although their answers usually appear convincing, they are also prone to errors – a flaw referred to as “hallucination”.

“We have these really, really impressive generative AI systems, but they get things wrong very frequently, and as far as we can understand the basic functioning of the systems, there’s no fundamental way to fix that,” says Mittelstadt.

Interesting that no one has developed a “significantly superior” search tool to steal customers away from Google.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/05/business/google-loses-antitrust-lawsuit-doj/index.html

Google loses massive antitrust lawsuit over its search dominance

Google has violated US antitrust law with its search business, a federal judge ruled Monday, handing the tech giant a staggering court defeat with the potential to reshape how millions of Americans get information online and to upend decades of dominance.

“After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” US District Judge Amit Mehta wrote in Monday’s opinion. “It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act.”

(Related)

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9eegg0rdvo

What could Google monopoly ruling mean for you?

… The US government specifically wants "structural relief" - so what could that look like?

The nuclear option would be to demand Google breaks itself into smaller chunks - a move US officials have not ruled out.

… That might cause consternation for Alphabet executives. But as long as Google remained the default search engine on devices, the average consumer would be unlikely to notice the difference. [Leaving Google still ubiquitous? Bob]

… The US said Google was currently paying firms like Apple more than $10bn a year to be pre-installed as the default search engine on their devices or platforms.

The judge agreed.

The contention is, had Google never spent that money, the big firms might have been encouraged to develop their own search experience. [Not their business model… Bob]

… Something that's easier to imagine is some kind of choice screen, where people opening a browser for the first time are asked whether they'd like to use Google or an alternative like Microsoft's Bing. [Oh, let’s pick one we’ve never heard of! Bob]

I am old, therefore I am wise?

https://www.bespacific.com/why-wisdom-work-is-the-new-knowledge-work/

Why “Wisdom Work” Is the New “Knowledge Work”

Harvard Business Review: “Today the workforce is getting older, and the number of younger workers in positions of senior management is growing. These two developments might appear to spell trouble, in that they seem to set the generations against one another, but the author of this article argues that in fact they represent an important opportunity: If companies can figure out how to enable the intergenerational transfer of the wisdom that comes with age and experience, they can strengthen themselves — and the workplace as a whole.

Others might find this useful…

https://www.bespacific.com/aba-task-force-releases-report-on-ais-opportunities-challenges-for-the-legal-profession/

ABA Task Force releases report on AI’s opportunities, challenges for the legal profession

The American Bar Association’s Task Force on Law and Artificial Intelligence released a report today titled “Year I Report on the Impact of AI on the Practice of Law” that details the work of the group over the past year. The AI Task Force, created in August 2023 by ABA President Mary Smith, brought together lawyers and judges from across the ABA to address the impact of artificial intelligence on the legal profession and the practice of law, provide insights on developing and using AI in a trustworthy and responsible manner, and identify ways to address AI risks. The AI Task Force has concentrated its efforts on a broad array of legal issues related to AI that will affect the legal profession including:

• the impact of AI on legal practice

• ethical dilemmas

• the challenges of generative AI

• access to justice

• the integration of AI in the courts

• advancements in legal education

• strategies for risk management and governance

Expert opinion?

https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/08/05/1095447/a-playbook-for-crafting-ai-strategy/

A playbook for crafting AI strategy

… Moving from initial forays into AI use, such as code generation and customer service, to firm-wide integration depends on strategic and organizational transitions in infrastructure, data governance, and supplier ecosystems. As well, organizations must weigh uncertainties about developments in AI performance and how to measure return on investment.

If organizations seek to scale AI across the business in coming years, however, now is the time to act. This report explores the current state of enterprise AI adoption and offers a playbook for crafting an AI strategy, helping business leaders bridge the chasm between ambition and execution.

Download the full report

Oh, the horror…

https://www.ft.com/content/70697929-4b53-440e-b770-2135e31ae318

Legal AI could force a rethink of the billable hour

… For now, most lawyers say they are optimistic about the impact on margins and revenues of adopting technology that can summarise, search, draft and review. Many are hoping for productivity gains that will help them do more — and sell more — billable work.

But there will be losers too. A third of UK law firms polled by PwC think generative AI will have a negative impact on profits and margins. AI might reduce one of the biggest firms’ competitive advantages, namely having large numbers of junior staff who can be deployed on large, complex lawsuits and transactions.

(Related)

https://www.bespacific.com/professors-currently-teaching-ai-law-related-courses/

Professors Currently Teaching AI & Law-Related Courses

Via LawSites – Professors Currently Teaching AI & Law-Related Courses (136) – Only group members can view professor and course details. Table format including Headshot; Name; Title & Organization; AI & the Law-Related Course(s).

Because my AI is better at this than I am.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4909907

Regulating Hidden AI Authorship

With the rapid emergence of high-quality generative artificial intelligence (AI), some have advocated for mandatory disclosure when the technology is used to generate new text, images, or video. But the precise harms posed by non-transparent uses of generative AI have not been fully explored. While the use of the technology to produce material that masquerades as factual (deepfakes) is clearly deceptive, this Article focuses on a more ambiguous area of harm: the consumer’s interest in knowing whether works of art or entertainment were created using generative AI.

In the markets for creative content—fine art, books, movies, television, music, and the like—producers have several financial reasons to hide the role of generative AI in a work’s creation. Copyright law is partially responsible. The Copyright Office and courts have concluded that only human-authored works are copyrightable, meaning much AI-generated content falls directly into the public domain. Producers thus have an incentive to conceal the role of generative AI in a work’s creation because disclosure could jeopardize their ability to secure copyright protection and monetize the work.

Whether and why this obfuscation harms consumers is a different matter. The law has never required disclosure of the precise ways a work is created; indeed, failing to publicly disclose the use of a ghostwriter or other creative assistance is not actionable. But AI authorship is different. Not only is there growing evidence that consumers have strong ethical and aesthetic preferences for human-created works, but we can understand such failure-to-disclose as damaging to art’s social role. Building on various theories of artistic value, the Article argues that works that masquerade as human-made destabilize art’s ability to encourage self-definition, empathy, and democratic engagement, turning all creative works into exclusively entertainment-focused commodities.

The Article also investigates ways to facilitate disclosure of the use of generative AI in creative works. Industry actors could be motivated to self-regulate, adopting a provenance-tracking or certification scheme. And Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforcement could provide some additional checks on the misleading use of AI in a work’s creation. Intellectual property law could also help incentivize disclosure. In particular, doctrines designed to prevent the overclaiming of material in the public domain—such as copyright misuse—could be used to raise the financial stakes of failing to disclose the role of AI in a work’s creation.