On the roster: The scariest stat you'll see all day -Trump tries outreach to Dems on DREAMers - Dems set demands on taxes - Flynn pushed plan that profited his client - 'You're my boy, Blue' THE SCARIEST STAT YOU'LL SEE ALL DAY When you consider the fact that a third of American adults cannot name a single branch of their federal government, you cease to wonder why things are so bad and begin to wonder why they are not already worse. In a poll conducted for the Annenberg Public Policy Center ahead of this weekend's celebration of the 229th anniversary of the ratification of the Constitution, only 26 percent of respondents could identify the executive, legislative and judicial branches, while 40 percent could name only one or two. Americans talk openly and often about the dumbing down of our culture, what we refer to as "The Big Stupid." It is a lament, but also something of a brag for people not clutched by ignorance of this magnitude. But it's easy to be an intellectual elite in a nation where not even half of the people know what kind of government they have.

The "rapid" growth of a police facial recognition database could lead to innocent people being unfairly targeted, a watchdog has warned. Biometrics Commissioner Paul Wiles said the Police National Database (PND) now had at least 19 million custody photographs on it. However, it is thought that hundreds of thousands of these could be of innocent people. The Home Office said police should delete images of unconvicted people. In a government review published in February, the Home Office concluded that those who are not convicted should have the right to request that their custody image is deleted from all police databases.

As with many other services, the legal profession is undergoing digital transformation. Established firms are facing competition from aggressive startups running digital only platforms. This disruption is requiring legacy firms to adapt. Meeting the challenge of digital transformation is not only necessary to remain competitive in terms of offering alternative channels, the use of digital technology can also assist with the amount of work involved with the legal process. As firms seek to adapt, machine learning is being adopted more and more in order to help companies grow more efficient and produce greater value from their processes.

Joy Buolamwini once built a robot that could play peekaboo. But there was just one problem: It couldn't see her. Buolamwini is black, and the facial-recognition software she used couldn't recognize her face. The software worked well enough with lighter-skinned people, so Buolamwini moved on to other projects. "[I] figured, you know what, somebody else will solve this problem," she explained in a TEDx talk about her work.

They all have to be tested before they roll out into the world, not only to meet government regulations but to verify adherence to a host of voluntary standards, like WiFi, Bluetooth, ZigBee, Thread and others. That is a lot of testing. And that's why TUV Rheinland recently opened a huge Silicon Valley test facility in Fremont, Calif. It's important for testing to be near the design teams, says TUV Rheinland's Sarb Shelopal, the company's global director of wireless and IoT testing. Distance, he says--and Silicon Valley's traffic--is a big deal when companies are trying to move fast.

Detecting sexual orientation might not be a pertinent issue when it comes to artificial intelligence (AI), but scientists are working on it, according to a study published last week. Ever since the study came to the fore, it has been facing stiff opposition from LGBTQ groups. The study says that it can distinguish between gay and heterosexual men accurately 81 percent of the time and between gay and heterosexual women 74 percent of the time. The study has raised an uproar with LGBTQ advocacy groups such as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC). The groups have called the study "A dangerous and flawed research that could cause harm to LGBTQ people around the world."

Even though the legal responsibilities of artificial intelligence machines are still being discussed, AI technologies are not waiting to disrupt the business of law as we know today. AI machines are capable of storing big data and searching for specific information within seconds. They can also provide in depth analysis and save time and money in legal processes and contracts. The best thing AI may do to the legal world is, when combined with blockchain solutions, provide clarity to judges on how to deal with criminal matters based mainly on the law and facts; avoiding personal opinions and corruption.

This post is an adaptation of a talk I recently gave for the Global AI Mind Web Series hosted and organized by Wetogether.co and GirlsinTech Taiwan. Whether you realize it or not, you are living in a world that has been dramatically altered due to artificial intelligence and automation. Advances in technology have been improving the efficiency of everyday processes and recreating our workforce in incremental ways. It's easy to adapt to these small changes as they are introduced, since they provide convenience and eliminate tedious tasks but as small changes add up they quickly create a new version of reality. When is the last time you had to filter spam from your email inbox?

Monkeys cannot create copyrightable works. This is an actual rule. In 2011, British photographer David Slater was photographing a troop of macaques when Naruto, a six-year-old, smiled into Slater's lens, pressed the shutter button, and captured this toothy selfie: The lawsuit seeks to establish that Naruto should own his selfie, just as any human being owns a selfie they take. After going viral and popping social media metrics rivaling Ellen DeGeneres' Oscar-selfie, the photo was posted on Wikipedia. Slater fired off a cease-and-desist letter, but Wikipedia refused to take down the photo because a monkey, not a human, created it. PETA jumped into the fray and sued Slater to establish Naruto's ownership of his selfie. After entertaining some giggle-inducing, "monkey-see, monkey-do" briefs, a federal court held that Congress did not intend to extend copyright protection to works created by animals. A recent settlement – in which Slater will donate a portion of future royalties to conservation charities – mooted the Ninth Circuit appeal. Nonetheless, this seemingly frivolous lawsuit has significant consequences.

This is an actual rule. In 2011, British photographer David Slater was photographing a troop of macaques when Naruto, a six-year-old, smiled into Slater's lens, pressed the shutter button, and captured this toothy selfie: The lawsuit seeks to establish that Naruto should own his selfie, just as any human being owns a selfie they take. After going viral and popping social media metrics rivaling Ellen DeGeneres' Oscar-selfie, the photo was posted on Wikipedia. Slater fired off a cease-and-desist letter, but Wikipedia refused to take down the photo because a monkey, not a human, created it. PETA jumped into the fray and sued Slater to establish Naruto's ownership of his selfie.