Workers at Amazon have demanded that their employer stop the sale of facial recognition software and other services to the US government. In a letter addressed to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and posted on the company's internal wiki, employees said that they "refuse to contribute to tools that violate human rights," citing the mistreatment of refugees and immigrants by ICE and the targeting of black activists by law enforcement. The letter follows similar protests at Google and Microsoft. "As ethically concerned Amazonians, we demand a choice in what we build, and a say in how it is used," says the letter, first reported by The Hill. The employees (it's not clear how many signed the letter) refer to the sale of computer services by IBM to the Nazis as a worrying parallel.

If you're like most litigators, knowing which judge is hearing your case can make a difference in your litigation strategy. It used to be that if it was a judge you or other attorneys in your firm had appeared before in the past, you could rely on your cumulative previous experience and build an argument that appealed to the judge's tendencies. But if it was a judge you were unfamiliar with, you were kind of in the dark. But AI has changed that. By accessing dockets on legal research sites, you can find just about every filing, motion, and ruling on record from a judge. All of it is valuable data that feeds AI algorithms and helps you identify a judge's tendencies and generate predictive outcomes.

A quiet wager has taken hold among researchers who study artificial intelligence techniques and the societal impacts of such technologies. They're betting whether or not someone will create a so-called Deepfake video about a political candidate that receives more than 2 million views before getting debunked by the end of 2018. The actual stakes in the bet are fairly small: Manhattan cocktails as a reward for the "yes" camp and tropical tiki drinks for the "no" camp. But the implications of the technology behind the bet's premise could potentially reshape governments and undermine societal trust in the idea of having shared facts. It all comes down to when the technology may mature enough to digitally create fake but believable videos of politicians and celebrities saying or doing things that never actually happened in real life.

While picture editors have tweaked images for decades, modern tools like Adobe Photoshop let them alter photos to the point of complete fabrication. Think of sharks swimming in the streets of New Jersey after Hurricane Sandy, or someone flying a "where's my damn dinner?" banner over a women's march. Those images were fake, but clever manipulation can trick news outlets and social media users into thinking they're real. By the time we figure out that they're phony, bombastic pictures can go viral and it's nearly impossible to let everyone know the image they shared is a sham. Adobe, certainly aware of how complicit its software is in the creation of fake news images, is working on artificial intelligence that can spot the markers of phony photos.

Nearly a decade ago, I had the good fortune of being one of the last people to interview the founder of Commodore International, Jack Tramiel (famous for Commodore computers and the popular C64), before he passed away. At 83 he died from heart failure after pioneering the consumer market for personal computers and home gaming, and working toward changing people's lives for the better through technology. What few people knew, and what I discovered in our interview, was that the foundational concept driving the Commodore 64 was Tramiel's vision for a future in which the Holocaust and its concentration camps (from which Jack survived but his father did not) would never be able to happen again. In our interview Mr. Tramiel told me: I made the market for the computer youth-driven. I went around the world meeting young people in computer clubs and showing them what the computer can do.

In the future, artificial intelligence may be the facilitator of decision-making, financial instruments and even conclusion of contracts. However, its actual power to impact these and other activities is difficult to predict. That's why various leading experts and organizations are pushing for the regulation of AI at many levels, all the way from consumer-grade to international markets. But it remains to be seen how AI use within companies can be regulated, what form this regulation will take and whether it can be truly effective. By contrast, Musk appears to fear that autonomous machines will take control of the world, having seemingly failed to grasp the definition of AI for the purposes of the debate over regulation. AI consists of the software-level processes capable of performing functions such as sifting through large quantities of data and reaching conclusions in line with their programmed parameters; the main application of AI lies in saving similarly capable humans from conducting lengthy and tedious tasks.

The rise of big data and the subsequent centrality of analytics has started to have an impact on nearly every industry and occupation in the globe – a trend that is only set to continue. With developing technology and more data to fuel analytics engines, we are probably going to find smart data tools everywhere – even in the court room. It may seem a little alien at first, but analytics and AI are already helping lawyers to do their job more effectively. Here is a look at early indications of just how useful it might be to use advanced data technology in the court room. Unlike glamorous TV shows of unforgettable court room battles, the reality of the law is that lawyers spend most their time reading.

The Law Society has produced a new horizon scanning report on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the legal profession. Over the next few years, AI will start to have a noticeable impact on the legal profession. This report explores the use of AI in legal practice, in areas such as document analysis and delivery, legal advisor support and case outcome prediction. It considers the likely implications on legal jobs, types of legal work and the impact on fee structures and costs. The report also examines the legal issues arising from the increased use of AI systems, including issues around transparency, ethics and liability.

Twenty years ago, setting up a timer to record on a tape your favourite TV show using a VCR device or recording a message on your voicemail was a total success in technology automation. Even the simple task of programming a digital alarm clock to wake us up at a certain time in the morning stopped being rocket science for some of us, fulfilling an inner desire to be part of a society that was unstoppably shifting into a digital transformation. This is just a small slice of how technology automation has changed over the past 20 years, and I assume we can all acknowledge that AI is gaining momentum, albeit regulatory authorities, legislators and lawyers not being fully sure how to adapt or embrace the change that's currently happening. Artificial Intelligence is here, it's the hot topic or the popular kid everyone wants to play in the park with. AI and automation are bringing us daily benefits; Internet and Big Data are becoming an essential part of both our work and private lives and we now have the capacity to collect huge sums of information too cumbersome for a person to process.

In the coming years "artificial intelligence (AI) will become pervasive and touch every aspect of our lives and we'll wonder how we ever did without it", explained Sonia Cooper, senior patent attorney of IP policy and strategy at Microsoft. Cooper made her prediction at Technology Patent Network Europe in London today, June 21. Speaking on a panel titled "The Outlook for AI Patents", Cooper was keen to extinguish any concerns about the role of AI in the future. She said: "When we think about AI we perhaps think about robots taking over the world, or machines getting more and more intelligent and outperforming us. The reality, of course, is quite different."