With the guiding question "how will AI become a part of our lives?", the AI Now Symposium, hosted by the AI Now Initiative and held on July 10, 2017 5:30–8:30pm at MIT Media Lab, aims to survey the biggest challenges we face as AI becomes more prevalent in our daily lives, from technical, research, and policy perspectives. I was fortunate to attend and liveblog this event, which featured a stunning lineup (including an incredible all-female panel) of experts from a diverse range of backgrounds and specialities. "What should we do" questions abound, from "who should regulate AI" to "how should we mitigate risks," but from our discussions it becomes clear that we do not fully understand AI and its effects in the first place. We spend time exploring "what can we do," asking questions such as "what is AI" and "what are the risks of AI." We leave the symposium with the prevailing thought that AI is as complicated and fallible as the humans that create it -- however and therefore, we should more thoughtfully create AI for the better. Joichi Ito, Director of the MIT Media Lab, gives opening remarks, beginning with a quote: "People worry that people will get too smart and take over the world, but the real problem is that they're too stupid and they're taking over the world."

U.S. House Republicans expect to introduce bills later this week that would bar states from setting their own rules for self-driving cars and take other steps to remove obstacles to putting such vehicles on the road, a spokeswoman said. The legislative action comes as major automakers are joining forces with auto suppliers and other groups to prod Congress into action. Last month, a U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce subcommittee held a hearing on a Republican draft package of 14 bills that would allow U.S. regulators to exempt up to 100,000 vehicles a year per manufacturer from federal motor vehicle safety rules that prevent the sale of self-driving vehicles without human controls. U.S. House Republicans expect to introduce bills later this week that would bar states from setting their own rules for self-driving cars and take other steps to remove obstacles to putting such vehicles on the road. Blair Ellis, a spokeswoman for the committee, said on Monday it was likely that legislation would be introduced this week and a formal hearing on the bills would occur next week. Republican U.S. Representative Robert Latta said last month he hoped to win committee approval of a bipartisan legislative package by the end of July.

Last month, a U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce subcommittee held a hearing on a Republican draft package of 14 bills that would allow U.S. regulators to exempt up to 100,000 vehicles a year per manufacturer from federal motor vehicle safety rules that prevent the sale of self-driving vehicles without human controls.

After responding to a domestic violence case in Tijeras, New Mexico on July 2, the Bernalillo County sheriff department initially announced that Amazon Echo, the voice-activated speaker device, had automatically called 911 that led the police to arrive at the scene. "Alexa calling and messaging operates via Wi-Fi between Echo devices or the Alexa app -- it does not support PSTN (public switched telephone network) calling," Hass said, NBC 26 reported. However, there are a few ways to get around the restriction, and get Alexa Echo or Echo Dot to call 911 during an emergency using third-party apps. After this is done, if the owner says "Google, dial 911" or "Alexa, dial 911" (provided one has switched the Google Now trigger word first), a call will be directly placed to the emergency services.

Senator Maria Cantwell is seeking a Republican co-sponsor for her bill, which would stipulate the creation of an advisory board that would advise the secretary of commerce on "networked, automated, artificial intelligence applications and robotic devices." Cantwell's bill stipulates that entities such as corporations, civil liberties groups and labor unions would send representatives to serve on the board. Representatives from the Department of Education and the National Institute of Justice (the research and development agency of the Justice Department) would serve on the board as well. For the moment, robots serve as a job creator -- but not for very much longer. The rapid advancement of AI technology has outpaced the law, with virtually nothing in terms of US federal regulation.

If you needed any proof that Europeans are decisive about enforcing regulations you don't have to look any further than the recent $2.7 Billion antitrust fine against Google. This comes in anticipation of new EU law called GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation). GDPR is just around the corner (May 2018) and carries significant financial fines for non-compliance. Without a doubt, the advent of ML, AI and Data Science has had a massive impact on our lives over the last couple of years and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Data science is … moving from a "wild west" attitude to quickly becoming a crucial part of most Global 2000's enterprises Bio: Martin Hack is the Executive Chairman of Kensu, a company that has developed the first of its kind GCP (Governance, Compliance and Performance) solution for Data Science.

This could happen as employees increasingly use workplace tools like Slack and Microsoft Teams, send emails using a corporate server or text using company-managed apps. "In the same way, AI can use the data-analysis technology (such as data monitoring) to determine if sexually suggestive communications are being sent." Flores says AI could be seen as a reporting tool to scan messages and determine if an innocuous comment could be misinterpreted. "If we had the AI super-nanny that could monitor speech and gesture, action and emails in the workplace, scanning tirelessly for infractions and harassment it would inevitably exchange a sexual-harassment free workplace for an oppressive work environment," he adds.

Cybercrime is on the rise, and the rapid digitization will drastically drive up cost of data breaches. Firms are looking for new software and systems to protect them. The "cyber crusader" companies that are creating these solutions are some of the brightest new stars in the AI firmament The fight against cyber criminals is never ending – and it is becoming big business. Cybercrime is already estimated to cost businesses up to USD 400 bn every year,1 while recent research predicts that the rapid digitization of every aspect of consumers' lives will drive up the cost of data breaches to USD 2.1 tn globally by 2019, more than four times the amount in 2015. Artificial intelligence (AI) and other technologies are increasingly being used to combat this threat, as passwords and other memorable information are being phased out due to fears that they are vulnerable to fraudsters.

Altman Weil principal Thomas Clay has spent over 30 years as a strategic consultant to law firms, so there's not much that surprises him about the industry anymore. If that isn't enough to give him an insider's view of the industry, his company created the Law Firms in Transition Flash Survey and he co-authors the Altman Weil Report every year. That said, a bonus question at the end of the 2017 survey gave him reason to raise an eyebrow at the results. The bonus question in this year's survey: "Technology tools that incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning, like Watson and Ross, are beginning to be adopted by some law firms. What is your firm's stance on the use of legal AI tools?" "Honestly, I'm amazed at how little AI has affected law firms so far."

Around midnight one Saturday in January, Sarah Jeong was on her couch, browsing Twitter, when she spontane ously wrote what she now bitterly refers to as "the tweet that launched a thousand ships." The 28-year-old journalist and author of The Internet of Garbage, a book on spam and online harassment, had been watching Bernie Sanders boosters attacking feminists and supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement. In what was meant to be a hyper bolic joke, she tweeted out a list of political carica tures, one of which called the typical Sanders fan a "vitriolic crypto racist who spends 20 hours a day on the Internet yelling at women." The ill-advised late-night tweet was, Jeong admits, provocative and absurd--she even supported Sanders. But what happened next was the kind of backlash that's all too familiar to women, minorities, and anyone who has a strong opinion online. By the time Jeong went to sleep, a swarm of Sanders supporters were calling her a neoliberal shill. By sunrise, a broader, darker wave of abuse had begun. She received nude photos and links to disturbing videos. One troll promised to "rip each one of [her] hairs out" and "twist her tits clear off." The attacks continued for weeks. "I was in crisis mode," she recalls. So she did what many victims of mass harassment do: She gave up and let her abusers have the last word.