This may be out of date but in this video by Lawful Masses lawyers are concerned that software AI tools which somehow (I don't recall) help them understand a case. This issue is the AI should not use information sourced from another client's confidential case/documents to inform them about another case but they don't know how it works. Responses from Microsoft were not forthcoming. I would argue they can't know unless they have access to the source code to verify what any (local) AI can do (not personally do it, but a trusted 3rd party audit which isn't behind closed doors).

And to have a third party making profit from it

So they established that language patterns measured by word frequency changed between 2022 and 2024. But did they also analyse frequencies across other 2-year time periods? How much difference is there for a typical word? It looks like they have a per-frequency significance threshold but then analysed all words at once, meaning that random noise would turn up a bunch of "significant" results. Maybe this is addressed in the original paper which is not linked.

Same, but for enshittified apps. Just do your job goddammit; no more, no less.

The platform owners don’t consider engagement to me be participation in meaningful discourse. Engagement to them just means staying on the platform while seeing ads. If bots keep people doing that those platforms will keep letting them in.