If two felons receive sentences of three years and seven years when they should both be sentenced to five, the difference is due to noise. The average of three and seven is indeed five, but justice has quite obviously not been served! It reminds me of the joke about the three statisticians on a hunt: the first one overshoots by a foot, the second one undershoots by a foot, and the third one says, "Got him!" In practice, errors of this sort don't cancel out but add up, with regrettable repercussions. A defendant's sentence should not depend on which judge the case happens to be assigned to, and yet it does.

A US judge has ruled that artificial intelligence can't get a patent for its creations, ruling that such a privilege is reserved for people. District court judge Leonie Brinkema backed a decision by the US patent office to turn away applications made on behalf of a "creativity machine" named DABUS. Brinkema issued a ruling on Thursday saying that "the clear answer is'no'" to the question of whether an AI machine qualifies as an inventor under patent law. "As technology evolves, there may come a time when artificial intelligence reaches a level of sophistication that might satisfy accepted meanings of inventorship," Brinkema said in the ruling. "But that time has not yet arrived and, if it does, it will be up to Congress to decide how, if at all, it wants to expand the scope of patent law."

The Transform Technology Summits start October 13th with Low-Code/No Code: Enabling Enterprise Agility. Governments face a range of policy challenges around AI technologies, many of which are exacerbated by the fact that they lack sufficiently detailed information. A whitepaper published this week by AI ethicist Jess Whittlestone and former OpenAI policy director Jack Clark outlines a potential solution that involves investing in governments' capacity to monitor the capabilities of AI systems. As the paper points out, AI as an industry routinely creates a range of data and measures, and if the data was synthesized, the insights could improve governments' ability to understand the technologies while helping to create tools to intervene. "Governments should play a central role in establishing measurement and monitoring initiatives themselves while subcontracting out other aspects to third parties, such as through grantmaking, or partnering with research institutions," Whittlestone and Clark wrote.

GoodIP was selected as one of the top innovative companies in the area of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Bavaria by Futurology.life. As a media company, Futurology's main aim is to boost innovative startups' investment by spreading information between other companies and institutional investors and by doing so, promoting innovation growth on a global scale. GoodIP is a tailored IP strategy solution that focuses on a non-bias AI approach for the evaluation of a company's IP portfolio. We are honored for the recognition as an innovative company that adopted the use of machine learning as a facilitator mechanism to understand the investment, strength, and quality level of a company's patents. Thus, as a startup that adopts AI to always provide clear and unbiased insights to our customers, the qualification and an "extraordinary organization" is a source of motivation to continuing growing, enhancing, and developing new technologies in the area of technology law.

Everyone is talking about artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, and some people in the legal field are already taking advantage of these technological capabilities. However, the extraordinary progress in legal AI technology has some lawyers worried about their prospects in their chosen profession, fearing that AI will soon replace them. This fear is unfounded because it is challenging for AI and machine learning technology to replace the job of a legal professional. On the contrary, technology enables growth and productivity since it increases accuracy, making legal work more efficient. AI algorithms can transform several tasks, offering excellent corporate compliance, contract management, discovery, and due diligence.

Apple has indefinitely delayed the introduction of its new anti-child abuse features, following widespread outcry from privacy and security campaigners. The company had said that the two new tools – which attempt to detect when children are being sent inappropriate photos, and when people have child sexual abuse material on their devices – were necessary as a way to stop the grooming and exploitation of children. But campaigners argued that they increased the privacy risks for other users of the phone. Critics said that the tools could be used to scan for other kinds of material, and that they undermined Apple's public commitment to privacy as a human right. Now Apple said that it will indefinitely delay those features, with a view to improving them before they are released. "Last month we announced plans for features intended to help protect children from predators who use communication tools to recruit and exploit them, and limit the spread of child sexual abuse material," Apple said.

Apple said it will delay the release of child safety features which included scanning phones in the U.S. for images of child abuse. In a statement emailed to USA TODAY Friday, Apple said it would take time to consider improvements to the features, which had been criticized for potentially harming users' privacy. "Based on feedback from customers, advocacy groups, researchers and others, we have decided to take additional time over the coming months to collect input and make improvements before releasing these critically important child safety features," said the company. Introduced in August, the child safety features were aimed at limiting the spread of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM). The features included tools in the Messages app warning kids and parents when they send or receive sexually explicit photos.

Apple says it's delaying the rollout of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) detection tools "to make improvements" following pushback from critics. The features include one that analyzes iCloud Photos for known CSAM, which has caused concern among privacy advocates. "Last month we announced plans for features intended to help protect children from predators who use communication tools to recruit and exploit them, and limit the spread of Child Sexual Abuse Material," Apple told 9to5Mac in a statement. "Based on feedback from customers, advocacy groups, researchers and others, we have decided to take additional time over the coming months to collect input and make improvements before releasing these critically important child safety features." Apple planned to roll out the CSAM detection systems as part of upcoming OS updates, namely iOS 15, iPadOS 15, watchOS 8 and macOS Monterey.

As algorithmic risk assessment instruments (RAIs) are increasingly adopted to assist decision makers, their predictive performance and potential to promote inequity have come under scrutiny. However, while most studies examine these tools in isolation, researchers have come to recognize that assessing their impact requires understanding the behavior of their human interactants. In this paper, building off of several recent crowdsourcing works focused on criminal justice, we conduct a vignette study in which laypersons are tasked with predicting future re-arrests. Our key findings are as follows: (1) Participants often predict that an offender will be rearrested even when they deem the likelihood of re-arrest to be well below 50%; (2) Participants do not anchor on the RAI's predictions; (3) The time spent on the survey varies widely across participants and most cases are assessed in less than 10 seconds; (4) Judicial decisions, unlike participants' predictions, depend in part on factors that are orthogonal to the likelihood of re-arrest. These results highlight the influence of several crucial but often overlooked design decisions and concerns around generalizability when constructing crowdsourcing studies to analyze the impacts of RAIs.

The judge said that most of the lawsuit could move forward, despite Apple's request to have it thrown out. Judge Jeffrey S. White, of federal district court in Oakland, did dismiss one piece involving users' economic harm. But he ruled that the plaintiffs, who are trying to make the suit a class action case, could continue pursuing claims that Siri turned on unprompted and recorded conversations that it shouldn't have and passed the data along to third parties, therefore violating user privacy.