That is the setting and it is given to us by the BBC. The first setting (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jxevd8mdyo) gives us ‘Microsoft error sees confidential emails exposed to AI tool Copilot’ which is not entirely true as I personally see it. And as the Microsoft spin machine comes to a live setting, we are given “Microsoft has acknowledged an error causing its AI work assistant to access and summarise some users’ confidential emails by mistake.” As I see it, whatever ‘AI’ machine there is, a programmer told it to get whatever it could and there the setting changes. With the added “a recent issue caused the tool to surface information to some enterprise users from messages stored in their drafts and sent email folders – including those marked as confidential.” As I personally see it, the system was told to grab anything it could and then label as needed, that is what a machine learning programmer would do and that makes sense. So there is no ‘error’ the error was that this wasn’t clearly set BEFORE the capture of all data began and these AI wannabe’s are so neatly set to capture all data that it is nothing less than a miracle it had not surfaced sooner. So when we laughingly see Forbes giving us a week ago ‘Microsoft AI chief gives it 18 months—for all white-collar work to be automated by AI’, so how much of that relies on confidential settings or plagiarism? Because as I see it, the entire REAL AI is at least two decades away (optionally 15 years, depending on a few factors) and as I see it, IBM will get to that setting long before Microsoft will (I admittedly do not now all the settings of Microsoft, but there is no way they got ahead of IBM in several fields). So, this is not me being anti-Microsoft, just a realist seeing the traps and falls as they are ‘surfacing’ all whilst there are two settings that aren’t even considered. Namely Validation and Verification. The entire confidential email setting is a clear lack of verification as well was validation. Was the access valid? Nope, me thinks not. A such Microsoft is merely showing how far they are lagging and lagging more with every setting we see.
And when we see that, is the setting we see (at https://arab.news/zzapc) where we are given ‘OpenAI’s Altman says world ‘urgently’ needs AI regulation’, and I don’t disagree on this, but is this given (by him of all people) because Google is getting to much of a lead? It is not without some discourse from Google themselves (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0q3g0ln274o) the BBC also gives us ‘Urgent research needed to tackle AI threats, says Google AI boss’, consider that a loud ‘Yes’ from my desk, but in all this, the two settings that need to be addressed is verification and validation. These two will weed out a massive amount of threats (not all mind you) and that comes in a setting that most are ignoring, because as I told you all around 30 hours ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/02/19/the-setting-of-the-sun/) in ‘The setting of the sun’ which took the BBC reporter a mere 20 minutes to run a circle around what some call AI. I added there too that Validation and Verification was required, because the lack there could make trolls and hackers set a new economic policy that would not be countered in time making them millions in the process. Two people set that in motion and one of them (that would be me) told you all so around December 1st 2025 in ‘It’s starting to happen.’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/12/01/its-starting-to-happen/) as such I was months ahead of the rest. Actually, I was ahead by close to a decade as this were two settings that come with the rules of non-repudiation which I got taught at uni in 2012. As such the people running to get the revenue are willing to sell you down the river. How does that go over with your board of directors? And I saw parts of this as I promised that 2026 was likely the year of the AI class cases and now as we see Microsoft adding to this debacle, more cases are likely to come. Because the greed in people sees the nesting error of Microsoft as a Ka-Ching moment.
So as we take heed with “Sir Demis said it was important to build “robust guardrails” against the most serious threats from the rise of autonomous systems.” I can agree with this, but that article doesn’t mention either validation of verification even once, as such there is a lot more to be done in several ways. If only to stop people to rely on Reddit as a ‘valid’ source of all data. Because that is a setting most will not survive and when the AI wannabe’s go to court and they will be required to ‘spout’ their sources, any of them making a mention of ‘Reddit’ is on the short track of the losing party n that court case. What a lovely tangled web we weave, don’t we? So whilst we see (there) the statement “Many tech leaders and politicians at the Summit have called for more global governance of AI, ahead of an expected joint statement as the event draws to a close. But the US has rejected this stance, with White House technology adviser Michael Kratsios saying: “AI adoption cannot lead to a brighter future if it is subject to bureaucracies and centralised control.””
Consider that court cases are pushed through a lack of bureaucracy? I am not stating it is good or bad, but in any court case, you merely need to look at the contents of ‘The Law of Intellectual Property Copyright, Design & Confidential Information’ and that is before they rely on the Copyright Act, because there is every chance that Reddit never gave permission to all these data vendors downloading whatever was there (but that is pure speculation by me). And in the second setting we are given “AI adoption cannot lead to a brighter future”, the bland answer from me would be. “That is because it doesn’t exist yet” and these people are banking on no one countering their setting and that is why so many of these court cases will be settled out of court. Because the truth of this is that the power of AI is depending on certain pieces being in place and they are not. Doubt me? That is fine, and I applaud that level of skepticism and you merely need to read the paper “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” which was written by Alan Turing in 1950 to see how easy the stage is misrepresented at present.
So is there good news?
Well if you want to get your dollars in court and you are an aggrieved party, your chances are good and the largest players are set to settle against the public scrutiny that every case beings to the table. And in this day of media, it is becoming increasingly easy as I see it. There is no real number, but it is set to be in the billions where one case was settled on $1.5B, as such there is plenty of work for what some call the ambulance chasers and they will soon get a new highway, the AI Chasers and leave it to the lawyers to find their financial groove and as I see it, people like Michael Kratsios are bound to add to that setting in ways we cannot yet see (we can see some of it, but the real damage will be shown in a year of two) so as some are flexing their muscles, others are preparing their war fund to get what I would see as an easy payday.
A setting that is almost certain to happen, because there are too many markers showing up the way I expected them to show. Not nice, but it is what it is.
Have a great day as you are all moving towards this weekend (I’m already there)
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 