> It's maybe a bit broad. I've always thought the difficulty in defining what AI is stems from a need to differentiate humans from the "artificial" part of it.

> It's maybe a bit broad. I've always thought the difficulty in defining what AI is stems from a need to differentiate humans from the "artificial" part of it. The real issue with using AI (from a law enforcement perspective) is the inability to put somebody under oath and ask them why they made the decisions they did. All the FTC really needs to say is something like "If we suspect your product is discriminating against a protected class and you can't (as a company) explain what the decision making process was (that was non-discriminatory) we will assume the worst."