Fake cases and fabricated quotes in legal filings are prompting courts and lawmakers to issue restrictions and education requirements.
Local-government officials are sometimes overwhelmed by new and improved digital tools. But they need to be open to technology that can help residents and public employees deliver critical services.
Research has found that computer models can predict the likely fate of proposed legislative amendments and the most effective pathways for lobbyists. This technology mixed with micro-legislation could muddle transparency.
A proposed bill would establish an Office of Artificial Intelligence and create a task force to study the emerging technology and establish an AI bill of rights. If passed, the legislation would be the first of its kind.
The legislation would limit use of facial recognition to investigations of certain violent crimes, human trafficking offenses or ongoing threats to public safety. If passed, it would be the state’s first limitation on the tech.
State Sen. Barry Finegold used the artificial technology software to draft a bill that would regulate generative AI models and would require companies to obtain “informed consent” from individuals before using, collecting or disclosing their data.
It’s hailed as the next wave of transformative technology, but artificial intelligence’s market growth and rapid deployment raise a host of issues, from safety to privacy to equity.
The airport and Customs and Border Protection will begin using scanners to collect and store biometric data from all foreign nationals entering and exiting the U.S., excluding Canadian citizens.
The town will not add the surveillance tech into its street security cameras installed this year after concerns about the technology’s reliability and privacy. Many say the software is discriminatory against people of color.
The county program runs images against a database of roughly 9 million mugshots of people who have been booked into detention facilities, but lacks a way to track its outcomes or effectiveness, according to a report.
The city’s police department spent the money on surveillance technology between 2007 and 2019, but listed the expenditures as “special expenses.” Some argue the department is not meeting disclosure requirements.
More than a dozen states have enacted laws regulating how law enforcement uses it. But federal legislation is needed: A piecemeal approach doesn't keep all citizens safe from misidentification.
The Ohio city hopes to, through a partnership with Case Western Reserve University and Cleveland State University, develop artificial intelligence technology to identify illegal dumping and alert authorities.
After several years of pushing, the Phoenix Fire Department has officially launched its unmanned aircraft, or drone, systems program, laying the policy and best practices groundwork for other city departments to follow suit.
Just two weeks after the city opened the door for police use of the technology, the council implemented more restrictions on facial recognition use, including a judicial requirement for searches. Some think the city can still do more.
A Livermore-based company hopes to implement fleets of driver-optional, electric tractors to farms and vineyards by the end of this year. But critics say the company has yet to prove its autonomous tractors are safe enough for use.
Most Read
