BakerHostetler became one of the first BigLaw players to publicly license AI technology for use in its firm, when it teamed up with the legal tech company ROSS this summer. The BigLaw firm is putting ROSS's AI technology to work in its Bankruptcy, Restructuring, and Creditor Rights practice, helping attorneys research the law a bit faster. But while BakerHostetler might have been first, it wasn't the last; other big name firms soon followed, bringing AI in to their practices. Plenty of firms are taking a cautious, wait-and-see approach to tech adaptation. It is, even if it's just through client demands.

Conservatives are girding for an extended clash on two fronts in the months ahead: one with a possible Clinton administration and one with Republicans who rejected Donald J. Trump. Megyn Kelly's divergent approach at Fox News took a different turn in her exchange with Newt Gingrich and again raised the question of the channel's future. A lot of healthy people are defying predictions by the Affordable Care Act architects and refusing to enroll, throwing off the calculations behind the system. The startling double-digital declines in TV viewership raise questions about whether the football and soccer leagues have reached their peak. Mr. Beatty's "Rules Don't Apply" is the first film he has written, directed and starred in since "Bulworth" in 1998.

Recent headlines about Artificial Intelligence (AI) flooding legal press in recent months with accompanying images of human-like robotic associates have many lawyers asking: will AI really take our jobs? And the follow up: can Siri or Alexa help me quickly research basic legal principles? My short answers are currently "no," and "not quite yet." The answer to the former is not likely to change; the answer to the latter is subject to change at any moment. In the meantime, my discussions around AI, or cognitive computing, and its place in the law, as well as my recent transfer from litigation partner to innovation partner, have allowed me to reach some (preliminary) observations about it all, and preview where I think the technology can and should be going in the practice of law – particularly, for the purposes of this article, litigation.

While Facebook's facial recognition technology may be useful for tagging photos, some user believe that it violates their privacy. The gathering of this biometric data is the subject of a lawsuit filed against the social network in May, under a unique Illinois law. The Biometric Information Privacy Act allows for fines of between $1,000 (£818) and $5,000 (£4,092) each time a person's image is used without permission. Facebook could be in hot water over its facial recognition software. The social media giant was accused of violating users' privacy by collecting and storing biometric data without permission in order to make tagging suggestions Facebook has repeatedly faced criticism for removing posts that were said to violate its community standards.

Advancements in artificial intelligence have set the world on fire. Our homes and pockets now contain voice-enabled intelligent assistants that are ready to answer any question, play music, coordinate our schedule, balance our budget, call us a taxi, replenish the pantry, and so much more. Our cars are now able to handle the driving on the highway, and very soon will not require our involvement at all. Bots are now providing customer service, booking our vacations, assisting lawyers and doctors, and protecting our networks. There is likely no task so complex that a machine cannot eventually be taught to do it faster and better than a human.

A Swedish industry group says a court ruling that drones with cameras must have a license under the country's surveillance laws "is a huge blow" to recreational and commercial users. Gustav Gerdes, head of Unmanned Aerial System Sweden, says Friday's decision by the Supreme Administrative Court could put 5,000 jobs in danger -- from drone operators to those handling footage. He said Wednesday that Sweden was among the first countries to ban camera drones with no surveillance license, adding permits can be expensive and difficult to get. The European Aviation Safety Agency recently released a rough, non-binding text for drone regulation, leaving it up to EU members states to decide whether to require licenses for drones with cameras. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Your consumers spend a lot of time exploring and analyzing suitable information―which books to study, which news articles to read, which songs to play, which movies to watch, which games to play, and so on. Imagine, what their experience would be like, if they don't need to pick anything on their own, but are presented with options of their liking―be it in education or media or entertainment. Here are some of the things they can be offered: • Adaptive text-books, in which content changes based on the pace of learning and comfort level of the reader. Such advancements reduce the overall time spent on information discovery, and increase the scope of effective information consumption (or learning). Domains such as education, publishing, entertainment, and advertisement mostly deal with granular digital assets (text, images, audio, video, multi-media, and so on), and are better prepared to enhance personalization even without creating new content from scratch.

Data-driven algorithms govern many aspects of life: university admissions, resume screening, and a person's ability to get a car or home loan. Often, using data leads to more efficient allocation of resources and better outcomes for everyone. But algorithms can come with unintended consequences--and without care, their application can result in a society we don't want. Typically, we think of algorithms as being neutral and objective, but when software is written and trained by humans, it often encodes the biases and prejudices of the people that make and shape it. Ultimately, the biases built into algorithms can be racist and marginalize low-ranking socioeconomic groups.

An artificial intelligence (AI) judge has accurately predicted most verdicts of the European Court of Human Rights, and might soon be making important decisions about cases. Scientists built an artificial intelligence computer that was able to look at legal evidence as well as considering ethical questions to decide how a case should be decided. And it predicted those with 79 per cent accuracy, according to its creators. The algorithm looked at data sets made up 584 cases relating to torture and degrading treatment, fair trials and privacy. The computer was able to look through that information and make its own decision – which lined up with those made by Europe's most senior judges in almost every case.

Bots are already scheduling meetings, ordering meals, and analyzing bank accounts. That means they must now suffer the indignities unethical bosses inflict on their human assistants, especially sexual harassment. As bots do more of our bidding, their algorithms are spending more time parrying flirtations, dodging personal questions, and dealing with darker forms of sexual harassment. "Lots of use cases come from that motivation," says Ilya Eckstein, CEO of Robin Labs whose bot platform helps truckers, cabbies, and other drivers find the best route and handle logistics. "People want to flirt, they want to dream about a subservient girlfriend, or even a sexual slave. It may just be more for laughs, or something deeper underneath the surface."