Artificial Intelligence (AI) is having a transformative effect on the business world and the $600 billion global legal services market is not immune. As AI automates basic processes, in the legal profession it promises to allow lawyers devote their time to more valuable, cost-effective, and strategic work. Consultants at McKinsey & Company estimate that 22% of a lawyer's job and 35% of a paralegal's job can be automated. However, the common perception among lawyers remains that machines cannot yet match the legal intellect of human lawyers in daily fundamentals of the profession. This assumption was tested in the first of its kind "AlphaGo"-style Study in the legal profession.

Joy Buolamwini was conducting research at MIT on how computers recognized people's faces, when she started experiencing something weird. Whenever she sat before a system's front-facing camera, it wouldn't recognize her face, even after working for her lighter-skinned friends. But when she put on a simple white mask, the face-tracking animation suddenly lit up the screen. Suspecting a more widespread problem, she carried out a study on the AI-powered facial recognition systems of Microsoft, IBM and Face, a Chinese startup that has raised more than $500 million from investors. Buolamwini showed the systems 1,000 faces, and told them to identify each as male or female.

As nearly every day brings additional news about how artificial intelligence (AI) will affect the way we live, a heated debate has broken out over what the United States should do about it. On the one hand, the likes of Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking argue that we must regulate now to slow down and develop general principles governing AI's development because of its potential to cause massive economic dislocation and even destroy human civilization. On the other hand, AI advocates argue that there is no consensus on what AI is, let alone what it can ultimately do. Regulating AI in such circumstances, these advocates claim, will simply stifle innovation and cede to other countries the technological initiative that has done so much to power the U.S. economy. The intense focus on these foundational questions threatens to obscure, however, a key point: AI is already subject to regulation in many ways, and, even while the broader debates about AI continue, additional regulations look sure to follow.

Cash flow, profits, and asset values are all about dollars. I think an additional set of measurements can be added to the mix around the value of data. Businesses should be measured not only via current financial measurements but also by the amount of monetizable data they can capture, consume, store, and utilize. This doesn't change the role of money; it just augments it with some new ways to value companies by looking at the value of the company's data. One reason for the rising value of data is the evolving landscape of business.

Artificial intelligence has beaten top lawyers for the first time in a competition to make sense of legal contracts. Researchers found that AI was 10 per cent more accurate than humans in spotting key legal issues with business contracts - an everyday task for most lawyers. The news will stoke fears over the threat AI poses to many jobs, with robots expected to replace 300 million workers worldwide by 2030. Artificial intelligence has beaten lawyers for the first time in a competition to make sense of legal contracts. The contract-reviewing algorithm was created by legal AI platform LawGeex, which has teams based in both New York City and Tel Aviv, Israel.

The nation's top lawyers recently battled artificial intelligence in a competition to interpret contracts -- and they lost. A new study, conducted by legal AI platform LawGeex in consultation with law professors from Stanford University, Duke University School of Law, and University of Southern California, pitted twenty experienced lawyers against an AI trained to evaluate legal contracts. Competitors were given four hours to review five non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and identify 30 legal issues, including arbitration, confidentiality of relationship, and indemnification. They were scored by how accurately they identified each issue. SEE ALSO: Google's new AI can predict heart disease by simply scanning your eyes Unfortunately for humanity, we lost the competition -- badly. The human lawyers achieved, on average, an 85 percent accuracy rate, while the AI achieved 95 percent accuracy.

In addition, Global Affairs Canada is leading a multi-university collaboration on artificial intelligence and human rights. For example, graduate students in Fenwick McKelvey's Media Policy seminar at Concordia University are contributing to a broad scan of AI's policy implications for human rights. McKelvey aims to link debates around AI to the expertise in communication and cultural studies that have long been questioning the cultural, social and political dimensions of media and technology.

Growing investments in Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology have transformed many areas in the business world, especially among high-tech and financial organisations. External spending on AI-related projects went up to $12 billion in 2016. Companies looking into AI may focus on the potential for automating low-skill tasks, but they are overlooking a major opportunity. Artificial Intelligence can also play a significant role in corporate governance. AI can help streamline decision-making processes, transform big decisions from gut feelings to data-driven knowledge, and better predict the future outcome of such decisions.

First, the futurist Amy Webb told the audience of journalists, librarians and foundation managers that they could easily be duped by the ever-growing purveyors of artificial intelligence. Images of their faces could be affixed to others' bodies, their voices to impostors. Media people have acknowledged to pollsters that they are so focused on the present that they don't pay close attention to what might be in store for them in five, 10 or 20 years. Later in her talk Wednesday before the Knight Media Forum in Miami, Webb told people of color that they weren't thought about when the creators of self-driving cars, GPS navigators, robotics and other such technologies were being developed. "My question is, what does all this mean for communities of color?" (video) asked Sara Lomax-Reese, president and CEO of black talk-formatted WURD radio in Philadelphia. She was one of about 500 at the sold-out conference sponsored by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. "It's not good," replied Webb. "Any person of color who's ever felt invisible, you're totally invisible to the networks. Right?" said the author of the 2016 book "The Signals Are Talking: Why Today's Fringe Is Tomorrow's Mainstream: Forecast and Take Action on Tomorrow's Trends, Today."

From early on, we're taught that intelligence is inextricably tied to the brain. Brainpower is an informal synonym for intelligence -- and by extension, any discussion of aptitude and acumen uses the brain as a metaphor. Naturally, when technology progressed to the point where humans decided they wanted to replicate human intelligence in machines, the goal was to essentially emulate the brain in an artificial capacity. What if all this talk about creating "neural networks" and robotic brains is actually a misguided approach? What if, when it comes to advancing A.I., we ditched the metaphor of the brain in favor of something much smaller: the cell?