Stefaan Verhulst
Article by Brian X. Chen: “This month, a federal judge ruled that a man’s conversations with Anthropic’s Claude chatbot were not protected by attorney-client privilege even though he had used the chatbot to prepare to talk with lawyers.
Two weeks ago, Ring, the Amazon-owned maker of doorbell cameras, provoked widespread outrage when it aired a Super Bowl ad showing how artificial intelligence could be used to find lost dogs. Critics quickly noted that it could also be used to monitor an entire neighborhood. The company has been on an apology tour ever since.
And over the past week, news surfaced that OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, had been aware of a British Columbia woman’s interactions with the chatbot and considered reporting her to the authorities months before she committed a mass shooting.
While OpenAI faces questions about whether it should have been more proactive about reporting what she wrote, the incident highlighted the possibility that A.I. companies will be under more pressure to share private chat logs with the authorities…(More)”
“A Data-Driven Framework for K-12 in the Age of AI” by The Burning Glass Institute: “AI is reshaping which skills matter for professional success—and, therefore, what students need to learn. This report provides a data-driven framework for K-12 educators to navigat this shift, analyzing AI’s impact on 1,000 workforce skills and mapping the implications for 140 high school learning objectives. It offers a clear method for identifying where and how curriculum needs to be rebalanced. Three key themes emerge:
The cognitive bar is rising. Skills with high automation exposure now demand deeper conceptual understanding, not less, to empower students to direct and evaluate AI tools.
The real divide is within subjects, not between them. No discipline loses relevance, but every discipline contains skills that require new instructional approaches alongside skills that remain foundational.
Traditional assessment faces new challenges. When AI can generate polished outputs, evaluation must focus on the students’ thinking, reasoning, and judgment.
The report introduces a four-quadrant framework—Deepen, Transform, Streamline, Anchor—that helps educators make evidence-based decisions about what to emphasize, what to redesign, and what to protect in their curriculum…(More)”.
Report for European Parliament: “This study was prepared at the request of the European Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO). It analyses the European Commission’s Digital Omnibus package proposals published on 19 November 2025, distinguishing administrative simplification from more substantive recalibration of safeguards across data, privacy, cybersecurity and artificial intelligence areas. The study highlights key areas of controversy (legal certainty, enforcement capacity, and impacts on rights) and sets out areas for consideration for parliamentary scrutiny….(More)”
Paper by Cecilie Steenbuch Traberg, Jon Roozenbeek & Sander van der Linden: “Conferences, journals, and funding calls in the social and behavioural sciences are increasingly dominated by (generative) AI. Many academics have rebranded themselves as “AI researchers”. Every project finds its “AI angle.” This shift is understandable and important: generative AI is a consequential technological development, and psychologists and behavioural scientists are well-positioned to examine its impacts. But this focus is becoming all-encompassing. The New Yorker recently argued that AI is “homogenizing our thoughts”: that by repeatedly surfacing the most probable continuations of human thought, these systems are nudging human reasoning toward conformity. Ironically, scientific culture is drifting toward a meta-version of that claim. While earlier work warned that increasing AI-adoption may lead to a scientific monoculture, empirical evidence now suggests this process is underway. In studying AI, research practices are themselves becoming more uniform – converging not only in what is studied, but in how questions are framed, investigated, and evaluated. Understanding this convergence as a feedback loop rather than an unavoidable trend opens the possibility of targeted interventions to preserve scientific diversity before monocropping becomes fully entrenched…(More)”.
Book by Mona Sloane: “The age of AI is not what you think. Rather than ushering in a fourth Industrial Revolution, AI has become a crucial social infrastructure of everyday life. It’s embedded in the tools, platforms, and systems that organize our most intimate lives and our interactions with the most fundamental institutions of society, from government agencies to banks and schools. In these linkages are embedded assumptions about who we are, what we can do, and where we belong.
In Predicted, Mona Sloane offers a pragmatic framework for understanding these transformations around prediction, classification, and linearity, proposing we rethink AI as a social arrangement that we coproduce. Drawing on over a decade of empirical research and real-world examples, this book invites readers to see AI for what it is: deeply social, deeply political, and open to change. Clear-eyed and provocative, Predicted is a call to reclaim deliberations about progress and innovation as a public good and to ensure that the futures we chart are the ones we choose—together…(More)”.
Report by Nasa Lifelines: Geospatial AI (GeoAI) offers transformative potential to support rapid disaster assessment, predictive modeling for early warning, population mapping in data-poor regions, and real-time tracking of displacement and infrastructure damage. These capabilities promise to deliver the speed, scale, and accuracy that humanitarian decision-making needs under growing time and resource constraints. Yet despite rapid technical advances, GeoAI adoption in humanitarian contexts remains uneven and constrained by non-technical factors. This study reveals a persistent mismatch between what is scientifically possible and what is operationally usable. While researchers optimize for model accuracy and methodological rigor, humanitarian actors require tools that work offine, communicate uncertainty clearly, integrate with existing workflows, and earn trust through transparency and field validation…”.
Article by Christopher Beam: “…Mention markets are the high-octane, fast-twitch speed competitions of the prediction market world. But they’re just one corner of it. Users of Kalshi and its primary rival, Polymarket, can bet on events major and minor, from politics to sports to culture to the weather. Recent markets on Kalshi have included whether certain words would be used during a Palantir Technologies Inc. earnings call, whether Elon Musk would win his court case against OpenAI and whether the highest temperature in Seattle on Feb. 4 would be within a certain range. Polymarket users have bet on whether the US would strike Iran on a particular date, whether a given Trump cabinet member would be the first to leave office and whether Jesus Christ would return before 2027.
Prediction markets were once a fringe obsession of economists and election wonks, but in the past year or so, they’ve gone from obscure to everywhere. The industry is booming thanks to a combination of marketing, distrust in traditional sources of information and a newly friendly regulatory environment. Late last year, Kalshi Inc. and Polymarket, both headquartered in New York City, raised funds at valuations of $11 billion and $8 billion, respectively. In the weeks leading up to the Super Bowl, Kalshi users were betting more than $2 billion a week, while Polymarket users were just shy of that, according to user-compiled data on Dune Analytics…(More)”.
Article by Yasemin Derebasi and Benjamin Bertelsen: “Thousands of reliable open-source solutions exist that can help countries address pressing development challenges. At the same time, an estimated 80% of government digital transformation projects fail to achieve their planned objectives…Across the world, there are several examples already demonstrating the art of the possible. For example, Linux powers more than 96 percent of the world’s top one million web servers. OpenSSL is an open-source technology that secures millions of encrypted connections daily, protecting everything from bank transfers to private messages. OpenMRS supports electronic medical records for more than 22 million patients in over 80 countries…
Open source operates around ‘Four Freedoms’, that include the freedom to inspect, use, modify, and distribute software. These freedoms directly map to the principles of human capability and agency. When communities can inspect code, they build technical literacy and transparency that bolster both personal autonomy and collective knowledge. When they can use software without restrictions, powerful technologies remain accessible to journalists, farmers, activists, and communities regardless of economic resources. When they can modify software, users can adapt tools to their specific contexts, such as customizing climate monitoring systems to local environmental conditions or tailoring financial platforms to national regulations. When people can distribute software freely, innovations spread rapidly across communities facing similar challenges. These freedoms enable power to become distributed rather than centralized, and innovation can flourish because solutions can be adapted to local challenges…
The Digital X 3.0 project, supported by Japan, offers a curated catalogue of mostly open-source solutions that have been deployed and validated in real-world development contexts – helping match what exists with what’s needed…You can learn more about the Digital X Catalogue here…(More).
Insights from 12 European cities’ processes of establishing Food Policy Councils by Rachel Reckinger: “Food Policy Councils (FPCs) are increasingly used to coordinate values-based territorial food networks in European cities. Their contribution, however, extends beyond formal policy outputs to the processes that enable deliberation, collaboration and stakeholder engagement. Drawing on four years of empirical work with 12 cities participating in the FUSILLI Project, we examine how FPCs are initiated, organised and embedded within local governance settings.The analysis revisits the distinction between “bottom-up” and “government-mandated” FPCs and shows that cases frequently combine characteristics of both. Rather than two distinct models, they form a spectrum of co-created arrangements in which civil society, municipal administrations, businesses and researchers negotiate roles and responsibilities. The urban scale emerges as a critical locus for this work, offering institutional proximity, opportunities for coordination across sectors and the capacity to link community initiatives with formal policy processes.Using a comparative framework, the study assesses FPCs along three dimensions: food system sustainability, food democracy and good governance. It considers stated objectives, governance practices, activities and outputs, and the outcomes that follow from them. The findings indicate that even early-stage or partial initiatives can strengthen participation, improve cross-sector coordination and support incremental system change.Overall, the paper clarifies the organisational configurations through which FPCs contribute to food system transformation. It identifies core features that underpin their durability and policy relevance, alongside optional elements that can enhance their performance. The results offer practical insights for policymakers and practitioners seeking to design or refine FPCs capable of supporting resilient and values-driven urban food systems…(More)”.
Book by Benjamin Farrand: “From the rise of China as a technological superpower, to wars on its eastern borders, to the belief that the US is no longer a reliable ally, the European Commission sees the world as more unstable than at any other time in recent history. As such, the Commission has become the Geopolitical Commission, working to serve the interests of the Geopolitical Union. Central to many of these conflicts is technology – who produces it, where it is produced, and who controls it. These questions are central to the Commission’s pursuit of digital/technological sovereignty, Europe’s attempt to regain control of technology regulation. Focusing on topics such as setting technological standards, ensuring access to microchips, reining in online platforms, and securing rules for industrial data and AI, this book explores the EU’s approach to lawmaking in this field; increased regulatory oversight and promotion of industrial policy at home, while exporting its rules abroad…(More)”.