The attorney general, Michelle Rowland, will confirm the decision on Monday, shutting the door on the proposal floated by the Productivity Commission and backed by tech companies. The attorney general, Michelle Rowland, will confirm the decision on Monday, shutting the door on the proposal floated by the Productivity Commission and backed by tech companies. The Albanese government has explicitly ruled out handing tech companies free rein to mine creative content to train their artificial intelligence models, after a fierce backlash from authors and arts and media groups. The attorney general, Michelle Rowland, will confirm the decision on Monday, shutting the door on a contentious proposal floated by the Productivity Commission and backed by tech companies. "Australian creatives are not only world class, but they are also the lifeblood of Australian culture, and we must ensure the right legal protections are in place," Rowland said.

As confidence in the C.D.C. wanes, states are asserting more control over their vaccine policies, creating a fragmented public-health system. Last week, former officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned members of Congress that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services, was endangering the nation's welfare by dismissing evidence and expertise in favor of his own vaccine skepticism. Kennedy "censored C.D.C. science, politicized its processes, and stripped leaders of independence," Debra Houry, the agency's former chief medical officer, said in a hearing this past Wednesday. The following day, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices ()--the scientific panel that influences U.S. vaccine policy more than any other body--began a chaotic and contentious two-day meeting about updating the country's vaccination recommendations. The committee's members had been handpicked by Kennedy, some of them joining just days before. Several of's decisions, which were announced last week, will have limited practical impact.

Things to Do in L.A. Tap to enable a layout that focuses on the article. California has a strict vaccine mandate. Will it survive the Trump administration? Dr. Neville Anderson, right, tries to distract Perry Roj, 4, while nurse Breanna Kirby gives her a DTaP polio vaccination. Her mom, Devin Homsey, holds her tight at Larchmont Pediatrics.

Farquhar, the Tech Council of Australia CEO, told ABC's 7.30 program on Tuesday: "all AI usage of mining or searching or going across data is probably illegal under Australian law and I think that hurts a lot of investment of these companies in Australia". Farquhar's claim overlooks that this is not a settled issue in the US, and could have devastating effects on creative industries. Farquhar's argument is that it is not theft of people's work unless the AI is used to "copy an artist directly" such as creating a song in their style. "I do think people would say that, hey, if people are going to sit down with a digital companion, an AI song creator and they collaboratively work with an AI to create something new to the world, that's probably fair use." Farquhar said the benefits of large language models outweigh the issues raised by AI training its data on other people's work for free.

Arts, creative and media groups have demanded the government rule out allowing big tech companies to take Australian content to train their artificial intelligence models, with concerns such a shift would "sell out" Australian workers and lead to "rampant theft" of intellectual property. "It is not appropriate for big tech to steal the work of Australian artists, musicians, creators, news media, journalism, and use it for their own ends without paying for it," Ley said on Wednesday. In an interim report on "harnessing data and digital technology", the Productivity Commission set out proposals for how tech, including AI, could be regulated and treated in Australia, suggesting it could boost productivity by between 0.5% and 13% over the next decade, adding up to 116bn to Australia's GDP. The commission suggested several possible remedies, including expanding licensing schemes, or an exemption for "text and data mining" and expanding the existing fair dealing rules, which it said existed in other countries. The latter suggestion prompted fierce pushback from arts, creative and media companies, which raised alarm their work could be left open for massively wealthy tech companies to use – without compensation or payment – to train AI models.

Tariff exemptions are fundamental to attracting Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into the manufacturing sector, though the associated administrative processes present areas for optimization for both investing entities and the national tax authority. This paper proposes a conceptual framework to empower tax administration by leveraging a synergistic integration of Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and Large Language Model (LLM) technologies. The proposed system is designed to first utilize OCR for intelligent digitization, precisely extracting data from diverse application documents and key regulatory texts such as tariff orders. Subsequently, the LLM would enhance the capabilities of administrative officers by automating the critical and time-intensive task of verifying submitted HS Tariff Codes for machinery, equipment, and raw materials against official exemption lists. By enhancing the speed and precision of these initial assessments, this AI-driven approach systematically reduces potential for non-alignment and non-optimized exemption utilization, thereby streamlining the investment journey for FDI companies. For the national administration, the benefits include a significant boost in operational capacity, reduced administrative load, and a strengthened control environment, ultimately improving the ease of doing business and solidifying the nation's appeal as a premier destination for high-value manufacturing FDI.

The shape of AI regulation is beginning to emerge, most prominently through the EU AI Act (the "AIA"). By 2027, the AIA will be in full effect, and firms are starting to adjust their behavior in light of this new law. In this paper, we present a framework and taxonomy for reasoning about "avoision" -- conduct that walks the line between legal avoidance and evasion -- that firms might engage in so as to minimize the regulatory burden the AIA poses. We organize these avoision strategies around three "tiers" of increasing AIA exposure that regulated entities face depending on: whether their activities are (1) within scope of the AIA, (2) exempted from provisions of the AIA, or are (3) placed in a category with higher regulatory scrutiny. In each of these tiers and for each strategy, we specify the organizational and technological forms through which avoision may manifest. Our goal is to provide an adversarial framework for "red teaming" the AIA and AI regulation on the horizon.

This story was originally published by WIRED and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Last Tuesday, President Donald Trump held a press conference to announce the signing of executive orders intended to shape American energy policy in favor of one particular source: coal, the most carbon-intense fossil fuel. "I call it beautiful, clean coal," President Trump said while flanked by a crowd of miners at the White House. "I tell my people never use the word coal unless you put'beautiful, clean' before it." Trump has talked about saving coal, and coal jobs, for as long as he's been in politics.

"What I do not understand is that we are supporting big tech instead of protecting European creative ideas and content." The EU's AI Act, which came into force last year, was already in the works when ChatGPT, an AI chatbot that can generate essays, jokes and job applications, burst into public consciousness in late 2022, becoming the fastest-growing consumer application in history. ChatGPT was developed by OpenAI, which is also behind the AI image generator Dall-E. He would like legislation to fill that gap, but said it would take years, after the European Commission's decision last week to withdraw the proposed AI Liability Act. "It might be getting very difficult.

In a joint statement, bodies representing thousands of creatives dismissed the proposal made by ministers on Tuesday that would allow companies such as Open AI, Google and Meta to train their AI systems on published works unless their owners actively opt out. The coalition includes the British Phonographic Industry, the Independent Society of Musicians, the Motion Picture Association and the Society of Authors as well as Mumsnet, the Guardian, Financial Times, Telegraph, Getty Images, the Daily Mail Group and Newsquest. Their intervention comes a day after the technology and culture minister Chris Bryant told parliament the proposed system, subject to a 10-week consultation, would "improve access to content by AI developers, whilst allowing rights holders to control how their content is used for AI training". The Conservative chair of the Commons culture, media and sport select committee, Caroline Dinenage, alleged the government had "fully drunk the Kool-Aid on AI". But Bryant told MPs: "If we were to adopt a too tight a regime based on proactive, explicit permission, the danger is that international developers would continue to train their models using UK content accessed overseas, but may not be able to deploy them in the UK … this could significantly disadvantage sectors across our economy, including the creative industries, and sweep the rug from underneath British AI developers."