A.I. re-creations of the "Magnificent Ambersons" stars Joseph Cotten, Agnes Moorehead, Dolores Costello, and Tim Holt. Edward Saatchi first saw "The Magnificent Ambersons," Orson Welles's mangled masterpiece from 1942, when he was twelve years old, in the private screening room of his family's crenellated mansion, in West Sussex. Saatchi's parents had already shown him and his brother "Citizen Kane." But "Ambersons," Welles's follow-up film, about a wealthy Midwestern clan brought low, came with a bewitching backstory: R.K.O. had ripped the movie from the director's hands, slashed forty-three minutes, tacked on a happy ending, and destroyed the excised footage in order to free up vault space, leaving decades' worth of cinephiles to obsess over what might have been. Part of this outcome was the result of studio treachery, but Welles, owing to some combination of hubris and distraction, had let his film slip from his grasp. Saatchi recalled, "Around the family dinner table, that was always such a big topic: How much was Welles responsible for this? Mum was always quite tough on him." Saatchi's father, Maurice, a baron also known as Lord Saatchi, is one of two Iraqi British brothers who founded the advertising firm Saatchi & Saatchi, in 1970, which led their family to become one of the richest in the U.K. Edward's mother, Josephine Hart, who died in 2011, was an Irish writer best known for her erotic thriller "Damage," which was adapted into a film by Louis Malle. Edward, born in 1985, grew up in London and at the sprawling country estate, surrounded by palatial gardens and classical statuary. He described his parents as "movie mad." The actor and Welles biographer Simon Callow, a Saatchi family friend, recalled, "They had a cinema of their own inside the house, and it was a ritual of theirs every week to watch a film together." Aside from old movies, Edward was obsessed with "Star Trek"--especially the Holodeck, a device that conjured simulated 3-D worlds populated by characters who could interact with the members of the Starship Enterprise. That kind of wizardry didn't exist in the real world, at least not yet. But the young prince of the Saatchi castle had faith that someday it would, and that it could bring the original "Ambersons" back from oblivion. "To me, this is the lost holy grail of cinema," Saatchi told me recently, like Charles Foster Kane murmuring about Rosebud. "It just seemed intuitively that there would be some way to undo what had happened."

Rep. Ayanna Pressley and Democratic lawmakers reintroduced the AI Civil Rights Act aiming to combat algorithmic bias affecting Black, Brown and marginalized communities.

Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey and Rep. Ayanna Pressley are pushing to ban the federal government's use of facial recognition technology, as Boston last week nixed the city use of the technology and tech giants pause their sale of facial surveillance tools to police. The momentum to stop the government use of facial recognition technology comes in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis -- a black man killed by a white police officer. Floyd's death has sparked nationwide protests for racial justice and triggered calls for police reform, including ways police track people. Facial recognition technology contributes to the "systemic racism that has defined our society," Markey said on Sunday. "We cannot ignore that facial recognition technology is yet another tool in the hands of law enforcement to profile and oppress people of color in our country," Markey said during an online press briefing.

Members of Congress introduced a new bill on Thursday that would ban government use of biometric technology, including facial recognition tools. Pramila Jayapal and Ayanna Pressley announced the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act, which they said resulted from a growing body of research that "points to systematic inaccuracy and bias issues in biometric technologies which pose disproportionate risks to non-white individuals." The bill came just one day after the first documented instance of police mistakenly arresting a man due to facial recognition software. There has been long-standing, widespread concern about the use of facial recognition software from lawmakers, researchers rights groups and even the people behind the technology. Multiple studies over the past three years have repeatedly proven that the tool is still not accurate, especially for people with darker skin.