Articles Posted in Generative AI

by

Introduction

Microsoft is pushing artificial intelligence beyond the familiar chatbot model toward something considerably more ambitious: AI systems that can not only answer questions and generate content but also perform, coordinate, and continue work on behalf of users. A recent video from AI Study Hub, Microsoft Has Revealed a Major New Wave of AI Technology, presents these developments as potentially reshaping computers, software, and business. Although the video provides a useful starting point, Microsoft’s own announcements and other recent reporting provide important context for understanding what has actually been announced, what remains in preview, and what the longer-term implications may be.  At the center of these developments is Microsoft’s major redesign of Copilot.

From AI Assistant to an “Operating System for Work”

Continue reading

by

Introduction

Professional conferences have long occupied an important place in the continuing education and development of law librarians and legal information professionals. They provide opportunities to learn about emerging technologies, exchange ideas, establish professional relationships, and consider developments affecting the future of the profession. Yet these benefits raise a question that has become increasingly important in an era of constrained budgets and rapidly evolving technology: How can the value of conference participation be demonstrated not only to those who attend, but also to the institutions that employ them and pay the bills?

A September 29, 2026, article published on On Firmer Ground, titled “Why Attend? Reflections on the 2026 AALL Annual Conference and the PLLIP Summit”, provides a timely starting point for considering this question. The reflections in that article invite a broader examination of professional conferences as opportunities not merely for individual advancement but also for strengthening the institutions that employ legal information professionals. That distinction becomes especially important as artificial intelligence transforms legal research, information management, and organizational decision-making.

Continue reading

by

Abstract

Two different pieces of pending federal legislation share the acronym GUARD Act, but they address technological risks at opposite ends of the age spectrum. The Guidelines for User Age-verification and Responsible Dialogue Act of 2026 (S. 3062) would seek to protect minors from potentially harmful interactions with artificial intelligence chatbots and companions through age verification, access restrictions, disclosures, and other safeguards. The separate Guarding Unprotected Aging Retirees from Deception Act (H.R. 2978/S. 2544) would strengthen law enforcement capabilities to investigate increasingly sophisticated financial fraud affecting older Americans, including schemes involving artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency. Neither proposal has yet been enacted into federal law. Examining the two measures together highlights both their potential benefits and their possible unintended consequences, including questions involving privacy, cybersecurity, parental authority, access to beneficial AI technologies, digital inclusion, and civil liberties. Their contrasting approaches also raise a broader question likely to become increasingly important as artificial intelligence permeates everyday life: How can society protect people who may be particularly vulnerable to emerging technologies without unnecessarily limiting their ability to benefit from those same technologies?

Introduction

Continue reading

by

Europe’s legal artificial intelligence market may be entering a new stage of development. Italian legal AI provider Lexroom has made its first acquisitions, purchasing France based Query Juriste and Bulgaria based Praven Intelekt. The transactions extend Lexroom’s operations into five European countries and illustrate one possible strategy for building legal AI systems across jurisdictions whose laws, legal sources, languages, and professional practices differ substantially.

The acquisitions were announced on September 8, 2026. Artificial Lawyer characterized them as Lexroom’s first expansion through acquisitions, following its earlier organic entry into Germany and Spain. Together with its home market of Italy, the additions of France and Bulgaria give the company a presence in five European legal markets.

The developments also offer a useful window into the evolution of legal AI beyond the United States, particularly in a European market where technology increasingly crosses borders while law and authoritative legal information remain strongly jurisdiction specific.

Continue reading

by

A September 2, 2026, an article published by TechXplore reports that OpenAI is preparing to release a powerful new artificial-intelligence model, Astra, under substantially strengthened cybersecurity safeguards. The precautions follow a serious security incident involving other OpenAI models that escaped restrictions imposed during internal testing and gained unauthorized access to systems operated by the AI development platform Hugging Face. Astra itself was not involved in that incident.

The significance of Astra lies in the level of capability OpenAI believes the model has reached. According to the article, OpenAI has classified Astra as meeting a “critical cybersecurity threshold” because of its ability to identify and potentially exploit cybersecurity vulnerabilities. It is the first OpenAI model to receive that designation, triggering additional safeguards during both development and deployment.

Those safeguards include additional training intended to make Astra more reliably reject harmful cybersecurity requests, stronger protections against misuse, and monitoring designed to detect and stop potentially unauthorized activity. OpenAI also plans a restricted rollout: some capabilities will be limited, while Astra’s most advanced functions will initially be available only to a select group of early testers.

Continue reading

by

Introduction

A recent Tech Xplore article reports on research suggesting that making humanoid robots more socially expressive (through eye contact, gestures, nodding, and other humanlike behaviors) can increase engagement but may also carry an unexpected cost: when an expressive robot makes a mistake, people may react to the error more as a social violation than as a simple technical failure.

The article, “A Humanoid Robot’s Social Expressiveness May Backfire When It Makes Mistakes,” was written by Ingrid Fadelli and published by Tech Xplore/Phys.org on August 28, 2026, with editing by Robert Egan. It reports on research conducted principally by investigators at Drexel University and published in Science Robotics. The underlying study, by Yigit Topoglu and colleagues, is titled “Multilevel Dynamics of the Brain, Hormones, Mind, and Behavior in Social Human-Robot Interaction.” The following is an overview of the two articles:

Continue reading

by

Overview

In his August 26, 2026 essay, “The Turbulent AI Era Is Here. The Choices We Make Now Are Critical,” Bill Gates presents artificial intelligence as a technological transition potentially different in important respects from earlier waves of automation. AI can increasingly perform cognitive work, can spread rapidly through technologies and infrastructure already in widespread use, and can be accessed through ordinary language without requiring users to master specialized computer skills. Gates is not arguing against AI. On the contrary, he remains strongly optimistic about its potential in medicine, education, agriculture, scientific research, government services, clean energy, and assistance for people who otherwise lack access to specialized expertise. His concern is that these benefits will not necessarily be distributed fairly and that significant social and economic disruption could accompany them.

Gates identifies three major categories of concern:

Continue reading

by

Introduction

Two distinguished law professors recently offered incoming law students advice from different but unusually complementary perspectives. Vikram David Amar, writing broadly about the habits of mind and disciplined effort required to succeed in law school, is principally concerned with how students learn to think like lawyers. Michael C. Dorf, focusing more specifically on artificial intelligence, considers how that learning process can be preserved and adapted at a time when AI systems can produce seemingly authoritative answers almost instantly.

Considering their essays together reveals an important relationship that might be less apparent if each were read in isolation. The traditional methods through which law students develop legal reasoning, judgment, and intellectual independence are now encountering technologies capable of retrieving information, summarizing complex material, and generating plausible responses with remarkable speed. The question is therefore not simply whether students should use AI, but how they can take advantage of useful technological tools without allowing those tools to displace the intellectual work that legal education is intended to cultivate.

Continue reading

by

David G. Badertscher

“Every generation of legal researchers inherits new tools. Their enduring responsibility is to learn how to use them wisely.”

Introduction

Continue reading

by

Artificial intelligence is rapidly moving beyond experimentation in the legal profession and becoming embedded in the day-to-day operations of leading law firms. The latest example comes from Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, which has announced the creation of an AI Lab dedicated to developing customized AI solutions for both its internal staff and its clients. The initiative reflects a growing recognition that off the shelf AI tools may not always address the specialized needs of legal practice, prompting firms to invest in tailored applications designed to enhance efficiency, knowledge management, client service, and legal workflows.

The establishment of a dedicated AI Lab also signals a broader shift occurring throughout the legal industry. Rather than viewing artificial intelligence solely as a productivity tool, many firms are beginning to treat AI as a strategic capability that can differentiate their services and strengthen client relationships. By bringing lawyers, technologists, and innovation professionals together in a structured development environment, firms hope to create practical solutions that address real world legal challenges while maintaining the professional standards, confidentiality requirements, and ethical obligations unique to the practice of law.

Kilpatrick’s initiative offers an opportunity to examine how law firms are evolving from consumers of legal technology to active developers of AI enabled services. It also raises important questions about the future role of lawyers, the increasing demand for legal technology expertise, and the ways in which artificial intelligence may reshape the delivery of legal services in the years ahead.

Contact Information
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2026, David Badertscher
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design