AI has revolutionized how we process information, optimize tasks, and conduct research. However, its integration into academia sparks ethical and practical debates. Should we limit its use? How can we assess a student's true knowledge if they employ these tools? This text explores these questions from the perspective of a technology expert who argues that banning AI is as absurd as rejecting calculators or spreadsheets in the past.
Over the past decade, cloud computing has experienced explosive growth, evolving from its nascent stage to widespread adoption and fundamentally changing how businesses and individuals use information technology. At the same time, traditional on-premise computing, while still having its use cases, has been progressively integrated with, and often even controlled by, Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) in many aspects.
This study analyzes the differences in domain name and IP address strategies among a number of current mainstream artificial intelligence (AI) service providers. We find that these technical choices not only reflect deployment decisions but also deep-seated corporate knowledge and capabilities in Internet infrastructure service provision, as well as brand positioning and market strategies.
Two sets of authors sued Anthropic and Meta in San Francisco for copyright infringement, arguing that the companies had pirated their works to train their LLMs. Everyone agreed that a key question was whether fair use allowed it, and in both cases, the courts looked at the fair use issue before dealing with other aspects of the cases. Even though the facts in both cases were very similar, last week, two judges in the same court wrote opinions, coming to very different conclusions. How can that happen? Is fair use broken?
On 17 May 1865, 20 European states convened to establish the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to streamline the clunky process of sending telegraph messages across borders. 160 years later, ITU's anniversary is more than a mere commemorative moment; it is a stark reminder that multilateral cooperation is beneficial and necessary in our increasingly interconnected world.
Tech developments saw less drama than trade and environmental shifts during Trump's first 100 days. Continuity, not abrupt change, defined his approach to AI and digital regulation. Only 9 of 139 executive orders (EOs) focused on tech. Trump's tech policy emphasised reviews and incremental shifts. Public consultations on AI, cybersecurity, and cryptocurrencies signal steady evolution over upheaval.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has become synonymous with innovation, transforming industries at an unprecedented pace. While some may frame AI as a groundbreaking development of our time, it's essential to acknowledge that its roots run deep. AI has evolved immensely from early tools like the abacus to present-day GPU-driven large language models. What sets the current landscape apart? The sheer scale of data, computational demand, and complexity of workloads.
As counterfeit networks grow more elusive, AI-driven clustering could revolutionize brand protection. By linking disparate findings, identifying serial infringers, and enabling bulk enforcement, AI offers a smarter approach to monitoring and takedown efforts. Yet, challenges remain - from data reliability to analyzing complex content. Companies that master AI-driven clustering may gain a significant advantage in the fight against brand abuse.
NVIDIA recently issued its third annual State of AI in Telecommunications report. The company manufactures many of the cards used in AI data centers, so the company is clearly focused on AI adoption. NVIDIA issues similar reports for other industries. The 2025 report is the result of a survey that NVIDIA administered to 450 telecom professionals across the globe.
Existing laws can address AI challenges without new regulations. Legal frameworks have adapted to past technologies, and AI should be no exception. The real issue lies in outdated legal immunities, like Section 230, shielding tech companies from AI-driven harms. Accountability should focus on those who create and benefit from AI, not AI itself.
At the end of the 20th century, Manuel Castells gave an outlook into the "Network Society" of the 21st century. One of his forecasts was that the world would move from "bordered places" (sovereign nation-states) to "unbordered spaces" (global networks). A quarter of a century later, we see that he was right and wrong. We do now have "unbordered spaces." We can communicate around the globe anytime with anybody, regardless of frontiers. But the "bordered places" did not disappear. More and more states are insisting on their "digital sovereignty."
"Building our Multistakeholder Digital Future" was the theme of the 19th edition of the UN-based Internet Governance Forum (IGF). It attracted more than 11.000 participants (Offline and Online) from all over the world in Riyadh/Saudi Arabia, December 15-19, 2024. In the 307 plenaries, workshops, open fora, lightening talks and other conversations in the meeting rooms and the lobby halls of the King Abdulaziz International Conference Center (KAICC), nearly everything...
In the wake of the election, sweeping policy shifts in the information economy are set to accelerate. Expect fast-tracked FCC reforms, Starlink subsidies, and AI-driven oversight to redefine media, tech, and regulatory landscapes. From relaxed antitrust to intensified media control, these eleven reversals signal a move toward deregulation and Chicago School libertarianism, with lasting impacts on U.S. markets and governance.
The Summit of the Future (SotF) was held at the United Nations Headquarters in New York on September 22 -- 23, 2024. World leaders, in the presence of stakeholders from the private sector, civil society, academic/technical communities, and youths, endorsed a landmark Pact for the Future of mankind. The Pact for the Future (P4F) (A/RES/79/1) was a significant, consensus-driven but non-binding document agreed upon by world leaders specifically on September 22, 2024.
As if we didn't have a long enough list of problems to worry about, Lumen researchers at its Black Lotus Labs recently released a blog that said that it knows of three U.S. ISPs and one in India was hacked this summer. Lumen said the hackers took advantage of flaws in software provided by Versa Networks being used to manage wide-area networks.