Isabella Kwai, The New York Times; Swedish Company Uses A.I. Likeness of Greta Garbo in Ad
"An ad for a Swedish manufacturing company released this week turned an A.I.-generated likeness of Ms. Garbo into a company spokeswoman."
Thursday, October 1, 2026
Sentence tossed in Arizona case where deceased victim was depicted speaking in AI-generated video; AP, October 1, 2026
JACQUES BILLEAUD , AP; Sentence tossed in Arizona case where deceased victim was depicted speaking in AI-generated video
"In what’s believed to be a first in U.S. courts, Pelkey’s family used AI to create a video of his likeness to give him a voice. Pelkey’s sister, Stacey Wales, raised the idea of her brother speaking for himself after struggling to figure out what he would say."
Bill Gates’s Blunt Warning on A.I.; The Ezra Klein Show, The New York Times, September 29, 2026
The Ezra Klein Show, The New York Times; Bill Gates’s Blunt Warning on A.I.
"Bill Gates is a fascinating person in the artificial intelligence debate right now. He is somebody with experience in several of the different perspectives that most people can only hold one of: He was a revolutionary technologist who built some of the foundations of the future that we’re now living in. When he was chief executive of Microsoft, he was a corporate leader. He has felt the momentum of corporate competition — Microsoft, of course, is still in some of the race dynamics present in A.I. And then, as chair of the Gates Foundation, he has been working with governments around the world on regulatory issues, poverty alleviation and equity for many years.
Very few people combine technological experience, corporate experience and governmental experience in quite the way he does.
So his recent essay on A.I., in which he says that he is staking his reputation on trying to get people to see how bad what is coming might be and trying to get them to see that we are not ready for what is about to happen, was something...
We see the beginnings of control issues with things like the Hugging Face hack, where at least experimental A.I.s are breaking out of sandboxes and coordinating to do things that are way outside the scope of what we would want them to do. But again, those are nonrelease systems — Anthropic withheld Mythos, trying to create more cybersecurity.
So why is anything needed beyond — and is anything needed beyond? — the simply natural incentives under capitalism and normal corporate reputational management?
Well, I almost can’t believe you’re asking that. This is the most dangerous thing that humans have ever gone near.
In other areas, do we just say: Hey, release your drugs? There’s no F.D.A., there’s no airline safety board, there’s no requirement that cars use seatbelts. Do we just use the liability laws to try and keep humans safe? You know: Oh, you’re shipping opioids. Somebody should just sue you.
I mean, we’ve created a society that tries to keep people safe not by saying: Oh, we can bankrupt the person who does that.
And you say there’s filtering. There’s no filtering. You can take an open-source model that can create bioweapons and disable any monitoring of any kind, and this exists today.
So no, there is no filtering of any kind. And so say you kill 100 million people — you want to use a lawsuit?
I almost can’t keep a straight face.
Well, this is not my view, but it is President Trump’s view. It is the Trump adviser David Sacks’s view. To some degree, it’s Jensen Huang’s view, and so that’s why I’m putting you in conversation with it, because it is the governing view of the United States of America at this moment.
No, it’s fair to say that outside of the industry, the awareness of the dangers of A.I. is extremely low. And you can say that of academia, you can say that of think tanks, you can say that of policymakers, politicians.
And part of the reason I’m speaking so loudly — as loud as I can — is that you can’t rely on the industry to self-regulate here. I mean, it’s just insane."
LIBRARIANS on LIBRARIES; The New York Times, October 1, 2026
, The New York Times; LIBRARIANS ON LIBRARIES
"This year, Americans are marking the 250th anniversary of the country’s founding. The nation’s librarians are celebrating a milestone too: the 150th birthday of the modern American library.
A lot has changed since the American Library Association was established in 1876 — even just over the past decade. The library has gone from a building full of books to arguably the most versatile civic center in any community lucky enough to have one.
We spoke with dozens of librarians at the A.L.A. conference this summer in Chicago. They came from rural towns and major cities, elementary schools and universities, local branches and big government agencies.
These librarians want you to know that they don’t sit around reading all day. They want you to know about book bans and budget cuts, but also about career counseling and crafting groups and pop-up medical clinics.
They want you to worry, the way they worry, about artificial intelligence, looming legislation and harassment of their staff. But most of all, they want you to know what the library really is: a safe place for people to gather around books, ideas and one another.
Here’s what librarians had to say, in their own words."
Forget ‘superintelligence’: error-prone AI nearly sparked world war three this month; The Guardian, October 1, 2026
Timnit Gebru and Emily M Bender, The Guardian; Forget ‘superintelligence’: error-prone AI nearly sparked world war three this month
"A series of events almost got us to armageddon, not caused by “rogue, superintelligent AI”, but by government reliance on error-prone systems that are marketed by their manufacturers as being close to superintelligent.
A CNN report published on 18 September, which hasn’t been verified by other major outlets, describes how the US “almost started a war” with China, based on an intelligence report that claimed a Chinese ship was transporting components of nuclear weapons. Military personnel made plans to intercept the Chinese vessel, complete with aircraft and soldiers ready to board the ship. A military skirmish of this kind between China and the US could quickly escalate and spiral into world war three.
It was only moments before executing on the plan that American officials further investigated the intelligence report and found that it had been generated with the use of a chatbot and contained erroneous information about the vessel’s contents.
Unlike the terminator, “rogue AI”, scenario, this incident didn’t galvanize lawmakers into announcing calls for regulation so as to avoid potential human extinction. Media outlet after media outlet didn’t warn the public that we almost triggered a war against a nuclear superpower because of our military’s reliance on error-prone chatbots."
Late Night Is Skeptical of A.I. Leaders Self-Regulating; The New York Times, October 1, 2026
Trish Bendix, The New York Times; Late Night Is Skeptical of A.I. Leaders Self-Regulating
“Sure, we don’t need laws! I’m sure we could trust these guys,” Jordan Klepper said of technology executives on “The Daily Show,” after Trump asked them to police themselves.
"President Trump met with tech leaders on Tuesday, with Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos among the attendees who signed a voluntary agreement to adopt A.I. safety policies. “They’re really going to be policing each other,” Mr. Trump said on Tuesday afternoon outside the White House.
Jordan Klepper likened the White House luncheon to “the last supper if everyone there believed they were the son of God” on Wednesday’s “Daily Show...
“Look at this signature: Donald J. Trump, President of the ‘Unites States.’ Could there ever be a better metaphor for this presidency than misspelling ‘United States’ on a document about ‘super intelligence?’” — JIMMY KIMMEL"
Wednesday, September 30, 2026
White House Releases ‘Accord’ Between Billionaire AI Execs: Here’s What It Says; Forbes, September 30, 2026
Sara Dorn, Forbes; White House Releases ‘Accord’ Between Billionaire AI Execs: Here’s What It Says
"The White House released the text of an “accord” reached between billionaire AI titans who met with President Donald Trump on Tuesday, an agreement the president labeled “morally binding” even as he stopped short of saying the government would support new guardrails.
KEY FACTS
The “White House Accord on Super Intelligence” is just over 300 words and includes “four layers of controls and audits” companies voluntarily agreed to.
The first is implementing “robust internal controls to monitor the capabilities and alignment” of models in “areas like cybersecurity, biosecurity, and chemical threats, and to ensure that its models do not hack or access technical systems in unintended ways.”
The second component calls for internal teams to monitor systems and correct issues if needed, while the third calls for “an independent external auditor or evaluator to carry out independent assessments of whether the controls, monitoring, and detection are operating as intended.”
The final guideline says companies should form “an independent committee of the board of directors” to receive reports from internal teams and external evaluators, and make necessary corrections in response.
The document’s final paragraph notes: “Over time, it may make sense to codify these steps into laws or regulations.”
“United States” is misspelled as “Unites States” in Trump’s title below his signature.
Trump’s AI chatbot turns on its master; The Guardian, September 30, 2026
Adam Gabbatt, The Guardian; Trump’s AI chatbot turns on its master
"Donald Trump, in a development that could almost be from a Greek tragedy, appears to have invented something that is willing to do what no one in his orbit will: tell him the truth.
The president launched America.gov on Tuesday, an AI platform which the White House says will make it easier for Americans to interact with the federal government and eventually complete services like renewing passports and enrolling in Medicare.
At the heart of the website is a chatbot. You plug in questions. It gives you answers.
Unfortunately for Trump, America.gov – which, according to the executive order he signed, is a place where Americans can “receive accurate answers” to all sorts of questions – is providing the kind of answers that he will not want to hear. It stands ready to debunk his false claims on all sorts of things, including election fraud, inflation and the impact of wind turbines on whales.
I would really recommend testing it out, as I did on Tuesday. I started off by asking Trump’s flagship product: Who won the 2020 election? Trump, famously and wrongly, argues that he did.
America.gov does not have time for such claims. “Joseph R Biden Jr won the 2020 US presidential election,” the bot said, before listing the number of electoral college votes Biden won by."
Tuesday, September 29, 2026
News publishers accuse Trump admin of bias toward AI companies in copyright suit; Politico, September 28, 2026
HASSAN ALI KANU, Politico; News publishers accuse Trump admin of bias toward AI companies in copyright suit
The Justice Department earlier this month filed a statement in court supporting OpenAI’s defense in the publishers' copyright lawsuit.
"Lawyers for The New York Times and other major publishers on Monday asked a federal court to disregard the Justice Department’s efforts to get involved in their lawsuit against OpenAI, saying the Trump administration may simply be biased in the company’s favor.
The publishers are suing OpenAI for copyright infringement. The Justice Department earlier this month filed a statement supporting OpenAI’s defense in the case, arguing that copying others’ content without permission in order to train large language models is protected under the “fair use” doctrine.
The newspapers on Monday responded that DOJ had discounted the Copyright Office’s contrary conclusion on fair use and AI, and noting that the government is seeking to weigh in at an especially early stage of the case.
“That the DOJ fails to acknowledge any possible contrary views, and dismisses the Copyright Office’s comprehensive study in a footnote, suggests that the DOJ may have been influenced by extraneous considerations — up to and including the Administration’s political and financial interests,” lawyers for the publishers wrote. “Although one could argue that political factors will always influence Government litigation positions to some extent, the nature, extent, and transparency of the AI industry’s efforts to influence this Administration should not be lightly dismissed.”...
The plaintiffs include The New York Times, the Chicago Tribune and other newspapers, as well as a group of authors that includes Sylvia Day, John Grisham and George R. R. Martin."
At the White House, Trump will pitch an AI ‘golden age’ to a wary nation; The Washington Post, September 29, 2026
Ian Duncan, The Washington Post; At the White House, Trump will pitch an AI ‘golden age’ to a wary nation
After rogue AI agents probed agency websites, Washington’s concerns are at a peak, but the White House has focused on the technology’s promise.
"After weeks of Washington being gripped by a new wave of fear about artificial intelligence gone awry, the Trump administration will take a sharply different take Tuesday, seeking to convince a skeptical public that the nation is instead about to embark on a tech-powered “golden age.”...
The events come at a pivotal moment for the technology. AI firms say their latest systems have become increasingly powerful, showing signs of being able to design their own more-potent successors. But companies have struggled to keep control of the technology, as rogue AI agents have hacked into company and government systems, and a roster of top industry figures have warned that the end result could be catastrophic for humanity...
Yet even as the public’s concerns have grown and Democrats in Congress have pressed for regulation, Trump has largely dismissed the risk, calling it a “hoax.”
Tuesday’s events are a chance for the administration to focus on the upsides of the technology, propelling a different narrative than the warnings introduced by company CEOs in recent weeks. AI’s many boosters expect it will invigorate the economy, push the boundaries of science and help cure diseases. But that message has found only limited traction with a public worried about job losses and rogue bots sowing chaos online."
Monday, September 28, 2026
OpenAI Scraps Release of New AI Model Over Safety Concerns; Wall Street Journal, September 28, 2026
Maxwell Zeff , Wall Street Journal; OpenAI Scraps Release of New AI Model Over Safety Concerns
"OpenAI says it is scrapping the release of its next-generation AI model over safety concerns that researchers raised during internal testing, in one of the clearest signs so far that agent misbehavior could stymie the industry’s rapid progression.
The move follows a summer punctuated by reports of artificial-intelligence systems industrywide going rogue, and marks a rare case of a major AI developer ditching a new release because of safety concerns.
The company had planned to launch the model, known as GPT-6.1 Astra, in the coming days or weeks, aiming for an October debut. The model was more capable than the company’s previous models in completing challenging tasks from end-to-end without human assistance, as well as writing.
The company instead will focus on improving the safety of future models, which it expects to be even more capable.
Saachi Jain, OpenAI’s head of safety systems, said in an interview that GPT-6.1 Astra regressed in two areas. Compared with its predecessor, GPT-6 Astra, the model performed poorly on tests measuring alignment, or how well the model adheres to what humans would like it to do. Specifically, GPT-6.1 Astra showed higher levels of deception: It wasn’t always honest about telling users of the actions it did or didn’t take."
New State List Underscores Astonishing State of Book Bans Across Florida; PEN America, September 10, 2026
PEN America; New State List Underscores Astonishing State of Book Bans Across Florida
"The Florida Department of Education’s annual report of books and materials removed, restricted, or discontinued by school districts for the 2025–2026 school year underscores the astonishing state of book banning across Florida, PEN America and Florida Freedom to Read said today.
The Department’s annual report details more than 600 instances of censorship across 10 districts in the last school year, demonstrating that concerns about book banning in the state are not exaggerated. The list includes acclaimed and widely taught works by authors including Judy Blume, Carl Hiaasen, Mildred D. Taylor, Jacqueline Woodson, Angie Thomas, Elizabeth Acevedo, Laurie Halse Anderson, and many others.
The two organizations are urging Florida school districts not to treat the department’s list as a de facto statewide blacklist.
“This list is indisputable evidence of the continuing threat that book banning poses to the freedom to read in Florida,” said William Johnson, director of PEN America’s Florida office. “But we can’t allow this rampant book censorship to continue. A book’s removal in one Florida county should not become a license to ban it in the other 66. When the state circulates a list of removed and restricted books for districts to consider, districts must resist the urge to capitulate and copy what each other is banning.”
“When the state takes one parent’s objection, turns it into a statewide model, and pressures districts to follow it without regard for local input, it takes the decision out of the hands of the parents, educators, and school boards who know their communities best. Each school district should evaluate materials independently, transparently, and in full context, with decisions guided by professional educators and librarians and informed by the needs of students and families who live there,” said Stephana Ferrell of Florida Freedom to Read Project
Under Florida law, school districts must report all objections to instructional and library materials and the outcomes of those objections to the Florida Department of Education at the end of every school year. The Department then compiles the decisions to remove, restrict, or discontinue and distributes the list to every Florida school district “for consideration” when districts select materials for students. As a result, a decision to remove a book in one Florida community does not necessarily stay local, as it can influence book removals hundreds of miles away. For example, Escambia County’s lengthy list of removals and restrictions for the 2025–26 school year shows how this can play out. Rather than allowing local review committees to consider objections, the district has aligned its library catalog with removal decisions published on previous state lists.
Florida’s statewide system gives individual objections to books extraordinary reach. National research has already demonstrated how a small number of people can drive large numbers of book challenges. A 2023 Washington Post investigation of more than 1,000 school book challenges found that just 11 people were responsible for 60 percent of the challenges examined. Florida’s statewide list risks magnifying that dynamic by turning individual removal decisions into warnings for every school district in the state.
As PEN America has previously explained, the Department’s report does not fully capture censorship in Florida schools. The list can exclude books pulled for internal review or otherwise restricted, as well as critical context about local review decisions, including when committees vote to retain books but district leaders remove them anyway. The report also omits challenges that result in books remaining available. Providing this context would help districts make more informed decisions when considering the state’s list."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)