Richard Stevens

Richard W. Stevens is a retiring lawyer, author, and a Fellow of Discovery Institute's Walter Bradley Center on Natural and Artificial Intelligence. He has written extensively on how code and software systems evidence intelligent design in biological systems. Holding degrees in computer science (UCSD) and law (USD), Richard practiced civil and administrative law litigation in California and Washington D.C., taught legal research and writing at George Washington University and George Mason University law schools, and specialized in writing dispositive motion and appellate briefs. Author or co-author of four books, he has written numerous articles and spoken on subjects including intelligent design, artificial and human intelligence, economics, the Bill of Rights and Christian apologetics. Available now at Amazon is his fifth book, Investigation Defense: What to Do When They Question You (2024).

Archives

How To Sue A Chatbot For Causing Suicide

_{If your child committed suicide because an online chatbot effectively encouraged him to do so, could you sue the chatbot makers?}_{Richard W. Stevens
November 1, 2024}

Sewell killed himself at the urging of a speaking and texting chatbot. The next gen is nearly flawless human impersonation video bots. Protect your children.

California Censorship Law Loses First Round in Legal Battle

_{Court zeroes in to protect First Amendment rights to vigorous political speech and expression}_{Richard W. Stevens
October 4, 2024}

Unless deepfake technology is outlawed wholesale, the collection of piecemeal laws and regulations aiming to fix this or that problem will grow without limit.

California: The New “Deepfakes” Ban Violates the First Amendment!

_{Outrage over the AI-generated imitations of Kamala Harris’s voice distracts from the issues around the state’s power grab over media}_{Richard W. Stevens
September 24, 2024}

AB 2839 targets political speech, the most protected form of expression under the First Amendment. There are 7 meritorious challenges

Richard Stevens on All Things AI and Law

_{Richard W. Stevens and Robert J. Marks
August 29, 2024}

In this episode, lawyer and Mind Matters News contributor Richard W. Stevens is on the show to discuss the legal issues and challenges around copyright, fair use, and the use of copyrighted material by AI systems. They discuss the implications of a recent Supreme Court case, Warhol vs. Goldsmith, that tackles the legal concepts of “derivative work” and “transformative work.” Host Robert Marks and Stevens discuss how the case could affect other cases involving artificial intelligence. The conversation also touches on the broader tensions between property rights in information/data and public access, and how AI is affecting the legal landscape around copyright and ownership in the digital age. Additional Resources “How to Stop Troubling Abuse From …

Yes, the Billion-Records Data Breach Is Real

_{My family and I were victims. Here’s how to find out if you are too and what you can do about it}_{Richard W. Stevens
August 26, 2024}

AI systems could analyze the huge database of stolen identities to refine their knowledge and attempt thousands of data breaches daily.

Google Decision Challenges Trillion-Dollar Internet Gatekeeper

_{How one company cornered the market for the human mind}_{Richard W. Stevens
August 9, 2024}

The judge ruled that Google operates unlawfully: It effectively excludes competitors while its prices and services are unresponsive to consumer market demands.

The Dark Art of Online “Nudging”: How to Protect Yourself

_{Organizations of all kinds use psychological tricks to move our minds as we browse — but a handy acronym helps detect them}_{Richard W. Stevens
July 31, 2024}

The FORCES acronym helps us sense when a website, app, news report, or video source is nudging us to think and act in ways that perhaps we hadn’t expected.

Attention: Mind Matters News Has Been Prebunked!

_{ChatGPT-4 produced attacks on Mind Matters News, aimed at people who had never heard of it (prebunking), based only on the About page and the Introduction}_{Richard W. Stevens
May 28, 2024}

Journalists who advocate prebunking to discourage audiences from seeing alternative information are helping propagandists defeat the search for truth.

Economics Assumes Human Beings Have Free Will

_{Every waking moment we humans live out a constant fact underlying all economic science: we act.}_{Richard W. Stevens
May 2, 2024}

“Free will denial is a cornerstone of materialist–determinist ideology,” wrote Dr. Michael Egnor here in February 2024. The deniers say we are “purely physical machines, meat robots.” Dr. Egnor cited well-known people who have prominently denied humans have free will. Dr. Egnor challenged deniers to demonstrate through their own actions that they truly have no free will. They will fail for Dr. Egnor’s stated reasons, plus one more: economics. The science of economics describes the behaviors of individual humans as they pursue their lives. Economics has discovered certainties, such as the Law of Supply and Demand, that describe how people produce, consume, trade, save, invest, and anticipate the future. Economics succeeds because it grasps certain universal truths about …

Deep Fake Videos Can Upgrade Political Humiliation and Rule by Fear

_{AI human impersonation video technology promises rule by terror to degrees never before imagined}_{Richard W. Stevens
April 13, 2024}

When propaganda is easily generated, millions fully embrace their inability to know the truth. They can’t so it doesn’t matter and never will.

Are Chatbots Biased? The Research Results Are In

_{The results are obvious and dramatic. Inject the preferred training materials and the chatbot will “believe” whatever the post-trainer intended}_{Richard W. Stevens
April 2, 2024}

People have noticed political biases in artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot systems like ChatGPT, but researcher David Rozado studied 24 large language model (LLM) chatbots to find out. Rozado’s (preprint) paper, “The Political Preferences of LLMs,” delivers open access findings from very recent research, and declares: When probed with questions/statements with political connotations, most conversational LLMs tend to generate responses that are diagnosed by most political test instruments as manifesting preferences for left-of-center viewpoints. The Chatbots’ Landslide of Opinion As reported in the New York Times, the paper restates that “most modern conversational LLMs when probed with questions with political connotations tend to generate answers that are … …

EU’s Massive New AI Law Won’t Stop Worst-Case Systems

_{The Act is drafted using legal language that confers broad additional power to governments}_{Richard W. Stevens
March 25, 2024}

At minimum, the AI Act serves humanity by identifying the many ways AI endangers fundamental human rights as well as human peace and prosperity.

Cyber Plagiarism: When AI Systems Snatch Your Copyrighted Images

_{Outright copying of others’ images may put system’s owners in legal jeopardy. Let's look at U.S. legal decisions}_{Richard W. Stevens
February 2, 2024}

The AI companies offering the image-creating services need Robot from Lost in Space in their legal departments waving its arms, crying out: “Warning! Danger!”

Human Impersonation AI Must Be Outlawed

_{I didn't used to think that AI systems could threaten civilization. Now I do.}_{Richard W. Stevens
January 29, 2024}

It must be declared a serious felony, akin to attempted mass murder, to produce, sell, possess, or use any AI-powered human impersonation system.

Facebook and Instagram Allegedly Hook Youngsters with Dopamine Triggering Tactics

_{Richard W. Stevens
January 14, 2024}

If parents don’t want their children addicted to stimuli and behaviors in the same manner as to drugs or tobacco, then parents need to protect their kids.

Can Artificial Intelligence Hold Copyright or Patents?

_{Robert J. Marks and Richard W. Stevens
December 28, 2023}

Should AI get legal credit for what it generates? On this episode of Mind Matters from the archive, host Robert J. Marks welcomes attorney and author Richard Stevens to discuss the concept of legal neutrality for artificial intelligence (AI) and its implications for copyright and patent law. Stevens explains that AI is a tool created and controlled by humans, and therefore should not be granted legal personhood or special treatment under the law. He argues that AI-generated works should be treated the same as works created by humans, and that the focus should be on the expression of ideas rather than the process by which they were created. Stevens also addresses the issue of copyright infringement and the challenges of proving originality and independent creation in cases involving …