The Guardian leads with a report into what it says is a law change that will allow police to run facial recognition searches on a database of Britain's drivers' licence holders. It writes that the law's critics believe it "poses risk of bias and threat to civil liberties". In international news, the paper also reports on the push for a second hostage deal between Israel and Hamas. Israel says 132 people remain unaccounted for after being abducted by Hamas and taken to Gaza on 7 October, an attack that provoked retaliatory strikes in the Palestinian territory that have killed some 20,000 according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Google has spent the past few weeks promoting generative AI tools that can summarize search results for users, help them draft essays, and swap out overcast skies for sunshine in otherwise perfect family photos. Today it's showing off what similar tools could do for its core business--selling ads. New generative AI systems for advertising clients will compose text on the fly to play off what a person is searching for, and they'll whip up product images to save them time and money on design work. The features add to the swelling ranks of AI-based text and image generators that have been introduced to online services over the past few months, since the abilities of ChatGPT and its image counterpart DALL-E inspired global excitement about generative AI. As the world's top seller of online ads by revenue, Google has been using AI programs for years to help clients target users, as well as helping them design ads, like by automatically editing the size of images.

Typically when we put out a call for audience questions, there’s no single topic that dominates. This time was different. The questions we received were overwhelmingly focused on artificial intelligence: Do A.I. systems pose an existential threat to humanity? Will robots take our jobs? How could these machines potentially make our lives — and the lives of our children — better? So I asked the show’s senior editor, Roge Karma, to join me to talk through them. We also discuss my mixed feelings about the calls to “pause” A.I. development, why I’m less worried about rogue A.I. systems than the incentives of the companies and countries developing A.I., the need for a “public vision” for A.I. development, whether A.I. companions can help address widespread loneliness, why I’m skeptical that A.I. advances will lead to skyrocketing economic productivity, the possibility that A.I. advances will lead to a post-work utopia, why I think of A.I. less as a normal technology and more as a “hyper object,” what A.I. systems are unveiling about what it means to be human and more. Mentioned: “Natural Selection Favors AIs over Humans” by Dan Hendrycks “2022 Expert Survey on Progress in AI” God, Human, Animal, Machine by Meghan O’Gieblyn “Resisting dehumanization in the age of A.I.” with Emily Bender “The Moral Economy of High-Tech Modernism” by Henry Farrell and Marion Fourcade Recommendations: “Some of Us Are Brave” by Danielle Ponder “In Memory of a Honeybee” by Felix Rösch “Clouds” by Felix Rösch and Laura Masotto “Driven” by Felix Rösch Mabe Fratti Trance Frendz by Ólafur Arnalds and Nils Frahm Thoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com. You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast, and you can find Ezra on Twitter @ezraklein. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs. This episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” is produced by Roge Karma, Kristin Lin and Jeff Geld. Fact-checking by Michelle Harris and Kate Sinclair. Mixing by Jeff Geld. Original music by Isaac Jones. Audience strategy by Shannon Busta. The executive producer of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Special thanks to Sonia Herrero and Kristina Samulewski.

In October, the White House released a 70-plus-page document called the "Blueprint for an A.I. Bill of Rights." The document's ambition was sweeping. It called for the right for individuals to "opt out" from automated systems in favor of human ones, the right to a clear explanation as to why a given A.I. system made the decision it did, and the right for the public to give input on how A.I. systems are developed and deployed. But if it did become law, it would transform how A.I. systems would need to be devised. And, for that reason, it raises an important set of questions: What does a public vision for A.I. actually look like?

This slow pace frustrated many fans of the games -- myself included. We know the backstory of Catherine Halsey (Natascha McElhone) and her use of kidnapped children for the Spartan soldier program that created the Master Chief. Except in this series, Master Chief is kept in the dark of his adopted mother and creator's sinister machinations, and the United Nations Space Command, humanity's authoritarian military power, is also unaware of Halsey's most dehumanizing, illegal experiments. His discovery of this scheme plays out rather slowly, and given that lack of action, the dramatic tension felt repetitive to knowing fans of the games' story.

Nigel is CEO and Founder of When Labs: artificial intelligence for augmenting management, driving compliance, employee engagement, retention, and productivity. Nigel's passion for HR and management comes from over two decades of building and managing teams from two to thousands around the globe, and led to his acquisition of Kenexa, a human capital management company, the 6th largest acquisition IBM had ever made. Nigel is a proven leader and innovator. As founding CTO of Footprint Software, a fintech startup, he engineered the largest retail banking system of its kind, building the fastest growing startup in Canada at the time, which sold to IBM. There, he architected IBM's entry into Open Source software, making IBM the first major corporation to embrace Linux and Apache, and was founding product line manager for their most successful organic software product of the last two decades, WebSphere.

If nothing else, you can this much for artificial intelligence: They're rarely afraid to look stupid. If a learning A.I. encounters something outside its preprogrammed knowledge, it will not typically be shy in asking the person with whom it is speaking to clarify. This can, however, make for rather monotonous conversation for the human involved in talking to the chatbot, voice assistant, or generally conversant robot: "What's an apple?" "What's tiramisu?" "What's cured meat?" "What's do you know literally anything about food you stupid recipe chatbot?" You get the idea, and as researchers from Japan's Osaka University point out in a recent spotlight on their work, that last line is indicative of the real problem facing A.I.: Asking questions might be the best way for them to learn, but that doesn't count for much if the barrage of questions is so irritating or tedious that the human wanders off.

The Center for Argument Technology (ARG-tech) located at the University of Dundee now provides tools based on in-house artificial intelligence designed for arguments. While that may sound completely useless given humans do extremely well at arguing each other, this AI is meant to make those arguments more productive, so everyone involved can reach an agreement. According to ARG-tech director Chris Reed, his group first turned to the BBC's Moral Maze 10 years ago. They created large "maps" based on every debate that took place on the show, and turned those maps into infographics using an algorithm to "determine the most central themes." From that data, the team pulled important issues, where participants stood, the highest points in conflict, and more.

As good as devices like the Amazon Echo have become at relaying information verbally, there are still some tasks that are better accomplished using a touchscreen. That's perhaps why Amazon in June released the $229.99 Echo Show, which includes a 7-inch touchscreen placed above a speaker. But the convenience of having a tablet-sized screen also introduced trade-offs -- the Echo Show is bulkier, pricier, and generally less attractive compared to the $99.99 cylindrical Echo. Echo Spot, Amazon hopes to solve some of those issues.

People used to dream about robot secretaries. Futurists imagined a world where computers obeyed our every command. When the Amazon Echo hit the market, that dream became a reality: Alexa was obedient, personable and all-knowing. She could carry out a myriad of basic tasks, with a personality as professional and unflappable as a human assistant. This year, Echo is more popular than ever, and despite competition from Google, Amazon still dominates 75 percent of the virtual assistant market.