|
OpenAI's Sam Altman said the company will amend its deal with the Defense Department (or the Department of War) to explicitly prohibit the use of its AI system on mass surveillance against Americans. Altman has published an internal memo previously sent to employees on X, telling them that the company will tweak the agreement to add language to make that point especially clear. Specifically, it says:
"Consistent with applicable laws, including the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, National Security Act of 1947, FISA Act of 1978, the AI system shall not be intentionally used for domestic surveillance of U.S. persons and nationals.
For the avoidance of doubt, the Department understands this limitation to prohibit deliberate tracking, surveillance, or monitoring of U.S. persons or nationals, including through the procurement or use of commercially acquired personal or identifiable information."
Altman has also claimed in the memo that the agency affirmed that its services will not be used by its intelligence agencies, including the NSA, without a modification to their contract. He added that if he received what he believed was an unconstitutional order, he would rather go to jail than follow it.
In addition, the OpenAI CEO has admitted in the memo that the company shouldn't have rushed to get the deal out on Friday, February 27, since the issues were "super complex and demand clear communication." Altman explained that the company was "trying to de-escalate things and avoid a much worse outcome" but it "looked opportunistic" in the end. If you'll recall, OpenAI announced the partnership shortly after President Trump
|
|
Chris Titus Tech's Windows Utility (WinUtil) is a versatile PowerShell script that streamlines the management of your operating system. As a lightweight tool, it enables users to efficiently handle a variety of system settings and tweaks and to install multiple applications with a single click. [License: Open Source | Requires:
11|10 | Size: 670 KB ]
|
|
X will suspend creators from its revenue sharing program if they post AI-generated videos depicting armed conflicts without disclosing they were made with AI. Head of product Nikita Bier announced the policy change on March 3, saying first-time violators will be cut off for 90 days and repeat offenders would be permanently removed from the program.
During times of war, it is critical that people have access to authentic information on the ground. With today's AI technologies,…
— Nikita Bier (@nikitabier) March 3, 2026
The policy is notably narrow, applying only to creators enrolled in the platform's revenue sharing program and only to AI-generated videos of armed conflicts, not AI content in general or non-monetized accounts. Violations will be flagged through Community Notes, X's crowd-sourced fact-checking system, or by detecting metadata from generative AI tools. Bier framed the change as necessary "during times of war," though the current conflict unfolding between the United States, Israel and Iran has not been formally, or at least not legally, declared a war. Of course, the US has not formally declared war since 1942.
|
RELATED ARTICLES | | |
|
As AI-generated artwork becomes more commonplace, it still won't be able to be copyrighted, according to US courts. On Monday, the US Supreme Court declined to hear a case about whether an artwork generated with the help of AI can be copyrighted. The refusal means that a lower court's decision to reject the copyright request will stand.
The case dates back to 2018 when Stephen Thaler applied for a copyright of an artwork called A Recent Entrance to Paradise. Unlike using ChatGPT or Midjourney, Thaler, a computer scientist, created an AI system that generated the artwork in question. However, the US Copyright Office rejected his application in 2022 on the grounds that it wasn't made by a human author. Thaler sought appeals at higher courts, but ultimately had to escalate the case to the Supreme Court after both a federal judge in Washington and the US Court of Appeals ruled against him.
With a refusal from the highest court in the US, it's unlikely Thaler's case can continue. The US Supreme Court could always hear a related case in the future, but Thaler's lawyers said, "even ?if it later overturns the Copyright Office's test in another case, it will be too late," adding that the decision will have negatively impacted the
|
|
