China and Military Power through Artificial Intelligence Complacency or eased trade restrictions on dual-use technology would be the greater danger. We have seen that China is one of the many practitioners of the "Princeling" strategy, which enriches the associates or family members of powerful politicians in order to grease the skids for deals that, if considered on their own merits, would likely not be allowed by the national security gatekeepers whose mission is to protect valuable military technology from getting into the hands of America's adversaries. But the junction of China's growing cyber capabilities and its aggressive military buildup is in the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to military weapons and systems. Conducted by the People's Liberation Army (PLA), China's strategy in military expansion moves on many fronts, and AI work is integral to all of its military goals. We have seen that China is one of the many practitioners of the "Princeling" strategy, which enriches the associates or family members of powerful politicians in order to grease the skids for deals that, if considered on their own merits, would likely not be allowed by the national security gatekeepers whose mission is to protect valuable military technology from getting into the hands of America's adversaries. When asked recently whether Biden would keep Huawei on the US Entity List, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said that technology remains at the very center of US-China competition: "China has been willing to do whatever it takes to gain a technological advantage – stealing intellectual property, engaging in industrial espionage, and forcing technology transfer.

From healthcare and education to finance and policing, artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly embedded in people's daily lives. Despite being posited by advocates as a dispassionate and fairer means of making decisions, free from the influence of human prejudice, the rapid development and deployment of AI has prompted concern over how the technology can be used and abused. These concerns include how it affects people's employment opportunities, its potential to enable mass surveillance, and its role in facilitating access to basic goods and services, among others. In response, the organisations that design, develop and deploy AI technologies – often with limited input from those most affected by its operation – have attempted to quell people's fears by setting out how they are approaching AI in a fair and ethical manner. Since around 2018, this has led to a deluge of ethical AI principles, guidelines, frameworks and declarations being published by both private organisations and government agencies around the world.

Turkey says it is determined that Ukraine continues its food exports despite Russia announcing its withdrawal from a UN-brokered grain deal, a move that has heightened concerns for nations desperate for food assistance. Russia pulled out of the deal on Saturday after what it said was a major Ukrainian drone attack on its naval fleet in annexed Crimea. Despite Moscow's decision, cargo ships set sail carrying 354,500 tonnes of grain, the most dispatched in one day since the programme began in August. Turkey, which helped broker the agreement, remained committed to the deal. "Even if Russia behaves hesitantly because it didn't receive the same benefits, we will continue decisively our efforts to serve humanity," President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.

The White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released a blueprint for an Artificial Intelligence (AI) Bill of Rights, a set of five principles and associated practices to help guide the design, use and deployment of automated system, according to a release. The goal of the document and its accompanying handbook is to provide a roadmap for governments, corporations, academics, researchers and other stakeholders to better develop technologies to help rather than harm millions of consumers in housing, financial services, education and other public sectors. "Technology is the new civil rights frontier," President and CEO of the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) Lisa Rice said in a release. "We are learning more each day about how existing technologies harm people and communities. This plan will serve as a guide that encourages developers and marketers of AI tools to search for least discriminatory alternative (LDA) solutions in credit scoring, underwriting, pricing, tenant screening, health management, employee screening and other systems. "It will also continue to position the United States as a global leader in advancing policies and techniques for the development of fair, transparent, explainable, responsible AI." The need for such a document arose from recognized issues with AI and the algorithms used. Tools created with this technology to assist with hiring and credit decisions have been found to reproduce undesired inequities or even create harmful bias and discrimination. When it comes to housing, NFHA stated race-based laws and policies, segregation, private prejudices, real estate agent steering, bank redlining, appraisal bias and restrictive zoning ordinances have contributed to biased data pools, resulting in discriminatory algorithms. "Already, communities of color are facing disproportionate adverse effects from the rapid proliferation of AI technologies in the United States," David Brody, managing attorney of the digital justice initiative at the Lawyers' Committee, said. "The Bill of Rights establishes a new generation of fair information practices.

Abakar Saidov is co-founder and CEO of Beamery, a leader in talent lifecycle management. In the ongoing effort to help businesses address talent shortages and close skills gaps by developing personalized career paths for employees, artificial intelligence (AI) is being increasingly relied upon by time-pressured HR managers and recruiters. With new legislation and regulations being introduced around the use of AI in recruitment, explainability becomes key. By focusing on explainability, the business user can discuss, explain, review and audit the decision-making process, ensuring that their use of AI in talent and recruitment remains ethical. And whilst AI can analyze information and return recommendations to the user, it's important that the human in the loop takes responsibility for making the final decision.

Ukrainian officials said on Monday that Russian strikes hit Ukraine's critical infrastructure in Kyiv, Kharkiv and other cities. The strikes appeared to be retaliation for what Moscow alleged was Ukraine's attack over the weekend on Russia's Black Sea Fleet. Loud explosions were heard across the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv early Monday morning. Some residents received text messages from the emergency services about the threat of a missile attack. Air raid sirens were heard for three straight hours.

Several blasts shook Kyiv on Monday, days after Russia blamed Ukraine for drone attacks on its Crimea fleet in the Black Sea. At least five explosions were heard in the Ukrainian capital between 8:00 am (0600 GMT) and 8:20 am, according to AFP journalists. Kyiv had already been hit on October 10 and 17 by drones. After Monday's blasts, mayor Vitali Klitschko said in a Telegram message: "An area of Kyiv is without electricity and certain areas without water following Russian strikes." Monday's attack on the Ukrainian capital comes after Russia pulled out of a landmark agreement that allowed vital grain shipments via a maritime safety corridor.

Use of live facial recognition (LFR) by UK police forces "fail[s] to meet the minimum ethical and legal standards," according to a study from the University of Cambridge. After analyzing LFR use by the Metropolitan (Met) and South Wales police, researchers concluded that the technology should be banned for use in "all public spaces." LFR pairs faces captured by security cameras to database photos to find matches. China and other non-democratic regimes have used the technology to as part of their state surveillance tools. UK police have been testing its use in multiple situations to fight crime and terrorism.

Impersonating someone is hardly a revolutionary type of fraud, but this summer Patrick Hillmann, chief communications officer at cryptocurrency exchange Binance, found himself victim of a new approach to spoofing – using an artificial intelligence (AI) generated video also known as a deepfake. In August, Hillmann, who has been with the company for two years, received several online messages from people claiming that he had met with them regarding "potential opportunities to list their assets in Binance" – something he found odd because he didn't have oversight of Binance's listings. Moreover, the executive said, he had never met with any of the people who were messaging him. In a company blog post, Hillmann claimed that cybercriminals had set up Zoom calls with people via a fake LinkedIn profile, and used his previous news interviews and TV appearances to create a deepfake of him to participate in the calls. He described it as "refined enough to fool several highly intelligent crypto community members."

In September 2016, Stanford's "One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence" project (AI100) issued the first report of its planned long-term periodic assessment of artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on society. It was written by a panel of 17 study authors, each of whom is deeply rooted in AI research, chaired by Peter Stone of the University of Texas at Austin. The report, entitled "Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030," examines eight domains of typical urban settings on which AI is likely to have impact over the coming years: transportation, home and service robots, healthcare, education, public safety and security, low-resource communities, employment and workplace, and entertainment. It aims to provide the general public with a scientifically and technologically accurate portrayal of the current state of AI and its potential and to help guide decisions in industry and governments, as well as to inform research and development in the field. The charge for this report was given to the panel by the AI100 Standing Committee, chaired by Barbara Grosz of Harvard University.