Responsible, by ClearOPS

Being responsible is not easy, but without a dialogue, it is impossible.

Sometimes I wonder if the speed of technology is speeding up humans or vice versa. This past week was another head spinner. Let’s dive in. If you are new to this newsletter, welcome! I realized that some of our current customers were not on here - oops, my bad!

What I have for you this week:

• AI Shorts - a one paragraph synopsis

• AI Agents - the New Wave or Hype?

• Caroline’s weekly AI Governance tips

• Chef Maggie (my custom GPT) Recommends

• AI Bites

Your daily AI dose

5 Reasons to join Mindstream

• We’re the only AI newsletter you need

• We’re so good HubSpot bought us (like they bought The Hustle)

• 150,000+ strong community staying ahead of the curve

• We’re actually fun to read

• Written by an awesome team of real people, not AI tools

Click here to subscribe

P.S - you get a load of free stuff when you subscribe

The courts have ruled! OMG! Using publicly available data as training data infringes copyright!

Yeah, sorry, not quite. If you saw this headline, you were the victim of fake news. The case, Thompson Reuters vs. ROSS is an older case (so not one of the many GenAI copyright lawsuits) and has two specifics to its fact pattern that will make it seldom used precedent. First, ROSS is a direct competitor of Thompson Reuters and secondly, ROSS lifted Thompson Reuter’s copyright material for training its AI to create a product that did exactly the same thing as Thompson Reuter’s. The judge’s commentary is funny though.

Although, now that I think about it more, this case might be used as precedent for lawsuits claiming that distillation is harmful. I guess I will have to see if OpenAI tries to use it this way against DeepSeek.

South Korea banned DeepSeek’s chatbot for violations of its privacy law and DeepSeek said, “mea culpa?” I am not sure of the source of this information, so i find it hard to believe that DeepSeek would actually admit to the country of South Korea that it failed to comply with the law. If it did, it makes me like the company even more. It is counterintuitive, I know, but I think it demonstrates transparency, integrity and a kind of humbleness that is refreshing. It doesn’t make up for the fact that they are violating people’s privacy. They would need to disclose how they plan to rectify that error to really mend their previous grievances.

This past weekend, I finally followed through on a promise - my deep dive into AI agents.