Articles Tagged with Artificial Intelligence

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

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

Introduction

Artificial intelligence policy has often been characterized as a contest between those urging rapid innovation and those seeking greater regulation. A recently released statement entitled Pacing the Frontier suggests that this characterization may no longer be sufficient.

Signed by more than one thousand researchers and employees from leading AI organizations (including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, and others) the statement does not advocate halting AI research. Instead, it urges governments to help develop the technical and institutional mechanisms needed to ensure that future advances remain under meaningful human oversight.

Continue reading

by

Ohio has enacted a new law governing the use of drones by law enforcement, reflecting the growing effort by legislatures to adapt Fourth Amendment principles to rapidly evolving surveillance technologies. Signed by Governor Mike DeWine, House Bill 251 establishes that, in most situations, police officers must obtain a search warrant before using a drone to conduct a search when a warrant would also have been required had officers entered the location in person.

The legislation recognizes that unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have become increasingly valuable investigative tools while also raising significant privacy concerns. Until now, Ohio law addressed some warrant requirements for surveillance conducted from manned aircraft but did not specifically regulate drones. House Bill 251 fills that gap by extending traditional constitutional search principles to unmanned aerial surveillance.

Principal Provisions

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

Source: Mohamed Obaidy, Associate Director, Economic Policy Team, Center for New York City Affairs (CNYCA), Income Polarization Redux: NYC’s Wage Gains Are (Again) Flowing to the Top (2026).

Introduction

In Income Polarization Redux: NYC’s Wage Gains Are (Again) Flowing to the Top, Mohamed Obaidy examines recent wage, employment, and productivity trends in New York City and concludes that economic gains are becoming increasingly concentrated among higher-income workers and higher-paying industries. While New York City’s economy continues to grow and workers are becoming more productive, the benefits of that growth are not being distributed evenly across the workforce.

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.

by

The complete article “Your Conversations With AI May Not Be as Private as You Think,” published by Tech Xplore* in May 2026, reports on a study conducted by researchers at the IMDEA Networks Institute examining the privacy practices of leading generative AI platforms, including ChatGPT, Claude, Grok, and Perplexity AI. The researchers found that some AI systems incorporate tracking technologies associated with major technology companies such as Meta, Google, and TikTok, raising concerns about the extent to which user interactions may be monitored or shared with third-party analytics and advertising ecosystems. The following is an overview of the article:

According to the article, the study revealed significant variation in how AI services manage user privacy. While some platforms appeared to limit external tracking mechanisms, others transmitted metadata and usage information that could potentially be used to profile users or monitor behavioral patterns. The researchers emphasized that the concern is not necessarily that full conversations are publicly exposed, but rather that background data collection practices may operate in ways users neither expect nor fully understand.

The article also highlights the growing tendency of users to discuss highly personal, financial, medical, professional, and legal matters with AI systems. In light of this trend, the researchers caution against assuming that conversations with AI platforms are protected by the same confidentiality standards that apply to communications with lawyers, physicians, therapists, or other privileged professionals.

Continue reading

by

Artificial intelligence is now woven into the daily fabric of legal work. From case law research to contract analysis and compliance monitoring, AI systems are accelerating tasks that once required hours of manual review. But as these tools become more capable, the legal profession faces a central challenge: How can lawyers trust AI in high‑stakes environments where accuracy, transparency, and defensibility are non‑negotiable?

Two concepts have emerged as foundational to answering that question: interpretability and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). While distinct, they work together to create AI systems that are transparent, grounded in evidence, and aligned with professional legal standards. Although both have existed for some time, their integration into legal research remains in its infancy, and there is much to learn. This post explores how these systems are reshaping AI legal research based on a review of current industry sources.

Understanding Interpretability in Legal AI

Continue reading
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