Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily. Had you scanned any of the latest headlines around the TAKE IT DOWN Act, legislation that President Donald Trump signed into law Monday, you would have come away with a deeply mistaken impression of the bill and its true purpose. The surface-level pitch is that this is a necessary law for addressing nonconsensual intimate images--known more widely as revenge porn. Obfuscating its intent with a classic congressional acronym (Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes on Websites and Networks), the TAKE IT DOWN Act purports to help scrub the internet of exploitative, nonconsensual sexual media, whether real or digitally mocked up, at a time when artificial intelligence tools and automated image generators have supercharged its spread. Enforcement is delegated to the Federal Trade Commission, which will give online communities that specialize primarily in user-generated content (e.g., social media, message boards) a heads-up and a 48-hour takedown deadline whenever an appropriate example is reported.

OpenAI and Jony Ive's vision for its AI device is a screenless companion that knows everything about you. Details leaked to the Wall Street Journal give us a clearer picture of OpenAI's acquisition of io, cofounded by Ive, the iconic iPhone designer. The ChatGPT maker reportedly plans to ship 100 million AI devices designed to fit in with users' everyday life. "The product will be capable of being fully aware of a user's surroundings and life, will be unobtrusive, able to rest in one's pocket or on one's desk," according to a recording of an OpenAI staff meeting reviewed by the Journal. The device "will be a third core device a person would put on a desk after a MacBook Pro and an iPhone," per the meeting which occurred the same day (Wednesday) that OpenAI announced its acquisition of Ive's company.

Politico became one of the first newsrooms last year to win a union contract that included rules on how the media outlet can deploy artificial intelligence. The PEN Guild, which represents Politico and its sister publication, environment and energy site E&E News, is now gearing up for another first. The union's members allege that the AI provisions in their contract have been violated, and they're preparing for a groundbreaking legal dispute with management. The outcome could set a precedent for how much input journalists ultimately have over how AI is used in their newsrooms. Last year, Politico began publishing AI-generated live news summaries during big political events like the Democratic National Convention and the US vice presidential debates.

Over the past year, veteran software engineer Jay Prakash Thakur has spent his nights and weekends prototyping AI agents that could, in the near future, order meals and engineer mobile apps almost entirely on their own. His agents, while surprisingly capable, have also exposed new legal questions that await companies trying to capitalize on Silicon Valley's hottest new technology. Agents are AI programs that can act mostly independently, allowing companies to automate tasks such as answering customer questions or paying invoices. While ChatGPT and similar chatbots can draft emails or analyze bills upon request, Microsoft and other tech giants expect that agents will tackle more complex functions--and most importantly, do it with little human oversight. The tech industry's most ambitious plans involve multi-agent systems, with dozens of agents someday teaming up to replace entire workforces.

During the 33rd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), held in Jeju, I had the opportunity to meet with one of the keynote speakers, Gillian Hadfield. We spoke about her interdisciplinary research, career trajectory, path into AI alignment, law, and general thoughts on AI systems. Transcript: Note: the transcript has been lightly edited for clarity. This is an interview with Professor Gillian Hadfield who was a keynote speaker at IJCAI 2024. She gave a very insightful talk about normative infrastructures and how they can guide our search for AI alignment. Kumar Kshitij Patel (KKP): Could you talk a bit about your background and career trajectory? I want our readers to understand how much interdisciplinary work you've done over the years. Gillian Hadfield (GH): I did a PhD in economics and a law degree, a JD, at Stanford, originally motivated by wanting to think about the big questions about the world. So I read John Rawls' theory of justice when I was an undergraduate, and those are the big questions: how do we organize the world and just institutions, but I was very interested in using more formal methods and social scientific approaches. That's why I decided to do that joint degree. So, this is in the 1980s, and in the early days of starting to use a lot of game theory. I studied information theory, a student of Canaro and Paul Milgram at the economics department at Stanford. I did work on contract theory, bargaining theory, but I was still very interested in going to law school, not to practice law, but to learn about legal institutions and how those work. I was a member of this emerging area of law and economics early in my career, which of course, was interdisciplinary, using economics to think about law and legal institutions.

Large language models (LLMs) have made significant progress in natural language processing tasks and demonstrate considerable potential in the legal domain. However, legal applications demand high standards of accuracy, reliability, and fairness. Applying existing LLMs to legal systems without careful evaluation of their potential and limitations could pose significant risks in legal practice. To this end, we introduce a standardized comprehensive Chinese legal benchmark LexEval. This benchmark is notable in the following three aspects: (1) Ability Modeling: We propose a new taxonomy of legal cognitive abilities to organize different tasks.

You've probably heard that statistic that every search on ChatGPT uses the equivalent of a bottle of water. And while that's technically true, it misses some of the nuance. The MIT Technology Review dropped a massive report that reveals how the artificial intelligence industry uses energy -- and exactly how much energy it costs to use a service like ChatGPT. The report determined that the energy cost of large-language models like ChatGPT cost anywhere from 114 joules per response to 6,706 joules per response -- that's the difference between running a microwave for one-tenth of a second to running a microwave for eight seconds. The lower-energy models, according to the report, use less energy because they uses fewer parameters, which also means the answers tend to be less accurate.

On Wednesday, OpenAI announced that it had acquired the startup of iPhone designer Jony Ive, a big win for the company. Ive's startup is called io, and the purchase price is nearly 6.5 billion, according to Bloomberg, which would make it OpenAI's biggest acquisition to date. The official announcement didn't contain much detail and mostly consisted of Altman and Ive gushing about each other. "Two years ago, Jony Ive and the creative collective LoveFrom, quietly began collaborating with Sam Altman and the team at OpenAI. A collaboration built upon friendship, curiosity and shared values quickly grew in ambition. Tentative ideas and explorations evolved into tangible designs. The ideas seemed important and useful. They were optimistic and hopeful. They reminded us of a time when we celebrated human achievement, grateful for new tools that helped us learn, explore and create...We gathered together the best hardware and software engineers, the best technologists, physicists, scientists, researchers and experts in product development and manufacturing. Many of us have worked closely for decades. The io team, focused on developing products that inspire, empower and enable, will now merge with OpenAI to work more intimately with the research, engineering and product teams in San Francisco."

Despite their remarkable successes, state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs), including vision-and-language models (VLMs) and unimodal language models (ULMs), fail to understand precise semantics. For example, semantically equivalent sentences expressed using different lexical compositions elicit diverging representations. The degree of this divergence and its impact on encoded semantics is not very well understood.

Although the Cannes Film Festival is the world's most prestigious movie showcase, its spotlight rarely falls on nonfiction film. Years go by without a single documentary competing for its biggest honor, the Palme d'Or, and there is no separate documentary prize. Juliette Binoche, the president of this year's jury, devoted part of her opening-night remarks to Fatma Hassona, the Palestinian photojournalist who was killed in an Israeli airstrike the day after it was announced that her documentary Put Your Soul on Your Hand and Walk would be premiering at Cannes. But the film itself was slotted into a low-profile sidebar devoted to independent productions. The festival did, however, roll out the red carpet for The Six Billion Dollar Man, Eugene Jarecki's portrait of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, which premiered out of competition on Wednesday evening.