generative artificial intelligence

Generative AI has significantly shifted the experience of student journalists, prompting many school newsrooms to implement strict zero-tolerance policies and deploy surveillance software. These harsh measures stem from a generalized distrust by editors in student writers' ability to produce original journalism. Students interviewed found these increasingly invasive practices frustrating, with some even losing staff positions due to suspected AI use.

A survey found that 70% of U.S. teens now use generative AI for schoolwork, with students reporting using it both as a support tool and by going directly to chatbots for answers. However, fewer than one in three teens reported discussing safe use of AI with a teacher, and only one in four discussed determining the accuracy of AI-generated information. Experts warn that AI must not become a substitute for students doing intellectual work.

The Justice Department urged the D.C. Circuit to affirm a judge's finding of Google's illegal monopoly over internet search, approve data-sharing remedies, and reconsider the denial of a ban on Google's large payments to distributors like Apple. The government seeks to strengthen competition by preventing Google from using monopoly profits to stifle rivals, particularly in emerging generative artificial intelligence markets.

The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that citing fake AI-generated cases in legal filings is sanctionable conduct, even if unintentional. The case involved Jeffrey Kotchka, who used generative AI to draft his appellate brief without verifying citations, leading to six invalid or incorrect references. The court emphasized that reliance on AI does not absolve parties from adhering to court rules.

Princeton University is ending its century-old tradition of unsupervised in-person exams, requiring faculty supervision starting July 1 due to concerns over AI and doxing. The change follows reports of increased cheating perceptions and anonymous complaints linked to social media.

The Australian federal court has issued new guidance on the use of generative AI in legal proceedings, warning lawyers of penalties for misleading the court with AI-generated errors. The court highlighted the risks of false citations in court filings and emphasized potential financial or legal consequences for such misuse.

Child psychiatrist David Tatum was sentenced to 40 years in prison for using generative artificial intelligence to create child sexual abuse material by digitally altering images of clothed minors. The case highlights the growing concern about AI technology being misused to produce illegal synthetic child pornography. Law enforcement views this as an indication of an unsettling expansion in how AI tools are being exploited for child exploitation.