Make Sure to Include Your OATS in Your AI Diet: A Framework for Ethical AI Advancements

By Andrew J Thompson • March 15, 2024

The Landscape of AI Ethics

By Andrew J Thompson

Board Advisor, Ethicable.AI 


In the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligence (AI), most people recognize that ethical considerations should play a crucial role in ensuring that technological advancements align with principals of moral behavior and promote the well-being of individuals and communities. 


One framework that encapsulates these ethical tenets, especially in the context of large language models, is OATS – Oversight, Accountability, Transparency, and Safety. This framework not only underscores the fundamental principles of ethical AI but also incorporates essential concepts such as Privacy and Security to create a comprehensive approach towards responsible AI development and deployment. 


Oversight 

The first pillar of the OATS framework emphasizes the importance of governance and regulatory oversight in AI development and deployment. Oversight mechanisms should involve multi-stakeholder collaboration, including government agencies, industry experts, ethicists, and civil society organizations, not to mention any and all users of AI technologies who desire to participate in the conversation. The stakeholders contribute diverse perspectives and ensure that AI technologies adhere to ethical guidelines and legal frameworks. Additionally, oversight bodies should establish clear guidelines for data collection, algorithmic decision-making, and accountability mechanisms to prevent misuse or harmful outcomes. 


Accountability 

Accountability is a core principle in ensuring that AI systems are held responsible for their actions and outcomes. This includes accountability for both the developers and users of AI technologies. Developers should adhere to ethical guidelines throughout the AI lifecycle, including data collection, model training, and deployment. They should also implement mechanisms for auditing and explaining AI decisions, especially in high-stakes applications such as healthcare and criminal justice. On the user side, organizations and individuals using AI systems should be accountable for the ethical use of these technologies, including mitigating biases, ensuring fairness, and addressing potential harms. 


Transparency  

Transparency is key to building trust and understanding in AI systems. Transparency encompasses several aspects, including transparency in data sources and collection methods, transparency in algorithmic processes and decision-making, and transparency in the intentions and goals of AI applications. Developers should strive to make AI systems explainable and interpretable, enabling users and stakeholders to understand how decisions are made and identify potential biases or errors. Transparent AI fosters accountability, facilitates informed decision-making, and empowers users to engage critically with AI technologies. 


Safety 

Safety is paramount in AI development, encompassing not only physical safety but also psychological, social, and ethical safety. AI systems must be designed with safety considerations from the outset, including robustness to adversarial attacks, mitigation of unintended consequences, and protection of user privacy and security. Safety also extends to ensuring that AI technologies do not perpetuate harm or discrimination, especially in sensitive domains such as healthcare, education, and employment. Robust testing, validation, and continuous monitoring are essential to ensuring the safety and reliability of AI systems. 


 

Privacy and Security   

Beyond the immediate OATS framework, Privacy and Security are integral components that intersect with Oversight, Accountability, Transparency, and Safety. Privacy entails protecting individuals' personal data, ensuring consent and control over data usage, and minimizing risks of data breaches or unauthorized access. Security involves safeguarding AI systems from cyber threats, ensuring data integrity and confidentiality, and implementing secure infrastructure and protocols. Privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs) and robust cybersecurity measures are essential to addressing privacy and security concerns in AI applications. 


Some vital considerations already arising and appearing in cases that have come before courts in the US, include: 

  1. Misuse of AI as a resource to provide background research and citations for legal work and in academia, and 
  2. The potential to use AI in order to infringe upon the copyrights of artists in producing and publicizing images. 
  3. The impact of Github code sharing on the exploitation of data security with respect to generative LLMs. 


As regards the former, the biggest problem as it stands today is AI’s underperformance in terms of its ability to accumulate research data. It’s worthy of note that legal databases contain much more and more readily accessible case and statutory data for use in understanding the precedents and reasoning behind court decisions. 


The present LLM capabilities fall far short of those that should be available in coming months or years in terms of the deposits of data they will have the ability to access. But we will not know the degree to which AI will improve its reliability as a research tool in the law until we get there. 


The second concern is not only valid, but poses a much more serious, early threat to privacy and security when AI is generating images, in particular, and all visually produced data in general. Cases are in different stages of litigation that will seriously impact the boundaries around the use of AI to create depictions of figures in online formats. This is one area where collaborative oversight, government working with the private sector, will be vitally needed to protect content creators from the exposure of their property rights to machine learned access to them. 


Both of the above are heavily impacted by the existence and ubiquitous usage of Github, which enables the sharing of pre-exisitng software code, no matter who created it. The secret sauce in software is no longer the lines of code, it is the knowledge, understanding and capacity to manipulate code, as a tool, rather than as an outcome in and of itself. 


As AI technologies continue to advance, it is imperative to uphold ethical standards and values to harness the potential benefits of AI while mitigating risks and harms. The OATS framework provides a structured approach for integrating Oversight, Accountability, Transparency, and Safety principles into AI development and deployment, with Privacy and Security serving as foundational elements. By adhering to these ethical tenets and promoting responsible AI practices, we can foster trust, fairness, and community benefit in the AI-powered future. 


This is a moment where every one of us has the opportunity to participate in the conversation that will certainly impact the next generation of software technology and users’ ability to take advantage of the great new frontier of technology AI brings to bear. 


Andrew Thompson is the founder of Landmark Advisors, providing consulting, educational and other advisory services to technology-based startup companies providing AI, medical, healthcare, agricultural and manufacturing services to their customers worldwide. 

October 24, 2026
The landscape of federal fraud enforcement has fundamentally shifted. With the recent announcement of the $25 million Fraud Whistleblower Incentive Program (WHIP), the federal government is heavily crowdsourcing its anti-fraud efforts. American citizens are now financially incentivized to report suspected fraud operations in their communities to federal authorities, earning a 1 percent commission on the total dollar amount recovered. With the administration reporting that it has already uncovered $260 billion in fraud—and asserting that this is only a fraction of the true total—enforcement actions are aggressively ramping up. Recent federal raids on health care facilities and the seizure of properties allegedly purchased with misappropriated SNAP funds signal a zero-tolerance policy toward fraud. For the public, this dual-pronged approach creates unprecedented opportunities and substantial legal perils. Whether you have discovered massive fraud and want to report it safely, or you find yourself unexpectedly in the crosshairs of a federal investigation spurred by an incentivized tipster, navigating this environment requires highly experienced legal counsel. At Landmark Advocates, we understand the complex mechanics of federal fraud law from both sides of the aisle.
October 16, 2026
If you or someone you care about has ever faced criminal charges, you already know the potentially crushing weight of the justice system. The anxiety is paralyzing. The uncertainty about your freedom, your job, and your family’s future can make you desperate for a way out. In that moment of profound vulnerability, the prosecution will at some point try to slide a piece of paper your way using your attorney as the messenger: the plea offer. It may look like a life raft. It promises certainty. It offers at least a bit of a known outcome instead of the terrifying spectre of a trial. You sign your name, the judge walks you through a plea “colloquy”, determines his agreement, gives you your final sentence, then gavels the case closed, and you finally take your first deep breath in months. But fast forward a year, or five years, or ten. For a staggering number of people, that initial wave of relief inevitably curdles into deep, immovable regret. Because when you sign a plea agreement, you are not just accepting a guilty plea; you are accepting an outcome that may still be left to the judge’s discretion, and a permanent redefinition of your life. Before you put your pen to that paper, you need to be absolutely, undeniably sure you’re doing the right thing for you - today and in the future. The Conveyor Belt of Justice The reality of the modern American criminal justice system is not found in dramatic courtroom speeches or surprise witnesses. It is found in conference rooms and crowded hallways where futures are bartered away in minutes. Recently, the United States Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision in Hunter v. United States (June 2026), a case that pulled the curtain back on just how coercive agreements have sometimes become. In his concurring opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch—joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson—delivered a searing indictment of the modern system. “In our times, the jury trial has given way to a conveyor belt of plea bargains,” he wrote. He is exactly right. The system is no longer designed to test the government’s evidence; it is designed to process human beings as efficiently as possible. In Hunter , the defendant was indicted on charges that threatened him with up to 300 years in prison, as if he could live that long, and a $10 million fine. Faced with that apocalyptic scenario, he did what the overwhelming majority of defendants do: he took a bargain. He agreed to plead guilty to a single count involving roughly $38,000, and critically, he signed a waiver giving up his right to appeal. But the "conveyor belt" is not designed to be fair. Despite pleading to the $38,000 amount, the judge sentenced him based on uncharged conduct to repay a total of nearly $500,000, drastically increasing his prison time to 51 months. Because he had signed an appeal waiver, the government argued he had no right to fight back, even if the sentence was fundamentally flawed. While the Supreme Court ruled that an appeal waiver cannot be enforced if it results in a "miscarriage of justice", it made the holding very, very narrow and difficult for the typical defendant to use. The bigger lesson is chilling. Prosecutors routinely overcharge, stacking indictments so high that even an innocent person might be terrified into taking a plea just to avoid the risk of spending the rest of their life in a cage. Even then, they may find that a judge enters a sentence for a far longer period than they even thought possible. The conveyor belt is constantly moving, and the pressure to step onto it is immense. The Hidden Costs to the Prime of Your Life If you are between the ages of 18 and 45, you are in the critical building phase of your adult life. This is the window where you establish your career, buy a home, start a family, and build your financial foundation. A criminal conviction is a wrecking ball to every single one of those pillars. When you enter a plea agreement in court, the judge will tell you about the direct consequences: the probation, the fines, or the jail time. Sadly, many times these terms are more than what you anticipated when you signed the plea because the prosecution is skilled and artful at building in discretion for the judge to make your sentence worse than you expected. But if you can imagine there is something even worse, the reality is that what they do not spend hours explaining are the collateral consequences—the invisible chains that you will wear long after your formal sentence is complete. You might lose professional licensing. If you are a nurse, a teacher, a financial advisor, or a commercial driver, your career could evaporate the minute the plea is entered and you are guilty of a crime. Background checks have become universally standard; a felony or a crime of dishonesty on your record will immediately disqualify you from countless job opportunities, effectively capping your earning potential for decades. Housing applications get rejected. Your credit can be impacted. If you are not a U.S. citizen, a seemingly minor plea deal can trigger immediate deportation proceedings, tearing you away from your family. We see this all the time. Someone accepts a plea deal because they just wanted to avoid jail and "get it over with." Three years later, they are clean, sober, and trying to advance their career, only to hit a brick wall every time a background check is run. They realize, too late, that the quick fix was a permanent trap. They traded temporary peace of mind for a lifetime of closed doors. The Danger of the Willing Lawyer Perhaps the most tragic part of the "conveyor belt" is that some defense attorneys are all too willing to help operate it. It is an uncomfortable truth in the legal profession, but it needs to be said: a plea deal is easy. It requires less paperwork, less preparation, and less conflict. And to the client, it often seems like an easy way out at the time as well. When you hire a lawyer, you are entrusting that person, literally, with your life. But if your lawyer’s first instinct is to immediately ask the prosecutor for a deal, you are in danger. A lawyer who operates strictly as a plea negotiator is not defending you; they are simply facilitating your surrender - when the opportunity is always there to fight for your rights. Pleas are entered frequently when defendants feel pressured by their own counsel. The lawyer points out the towering stack of charges—just as in the Hunter case—and tells the client that a trial is very risky. While it is a lawyer’s duty to provide an honest assessment of risk, it is also his job to fight. If the government cannot prove its case, or if the police violated your constitutional rights to obtain their evidence, riding on the conveyor belt is a tragedy. You need a defense that pushes back against the machinery, not one that greases the wheels. Serious charges deserve a defense that starts with planning for the outcome you desire. You may be able to get that - you may not. Either way, you deserve the best effort toward that end. If your goal is a negotiated resolution, we will pursue that with aggressive care, but even then, our focus remains on ensuring that your rights are protected and that you are not strong-armed into signing away your future. And if a plea is not your intent, we come to the case with a very different posture. We prepare to seek a dismissal. We prepare to take the case to a jury trial. We prepare to hold the government to its heavy burden of proof, exposing reasonable doubt wherever it exists, and giving you your life back intact. We understand the stakes. We know that your liberty, your clean record, and your ability to build a life at whatever stage you are now, is on the line. We cannot guarantee a specific result—no honest lawyer can—but we can guarantee that we will zealously advocate for your rights in the manner you choose to pursue them. Take Control of Your Future If you are facing a serious criminal charge, do not let panic dictate your future. Do not sign a plea agreement just because the system makes it convenient. Once that signature is on the page and the judgment is entered, unwinding a bad deal through post-conviction relief or an appeal is monumentally difficult. Remember that - once the plea is entered, you can’t undo it. Take a deep breath, step back and think clearly. Then speak to an experienced criminal defense attorney who is prepared to fight for the life you want to keep. If you want a defense team that plans a strategy built on your goals, contact Landmark Legal Services. Call us at (317) 360-5174 or request a case evaluation now. Let’s talk about the real options for your future, before you sign it away.
By Admin • March 22, 2025
Hernia mesh, a medical device used to repair hernias, has been associated with serious complications, causing significant pain and suffering for many individuals. If you or a loved one in Indiana has experienced adverse effects from hernia mesh, understanding your legal rights is crucial. This post explores the legal avenues available to those affected by hernia mesh complications in the Hoosier State. The Risks Associated with Hernia Mesh While designed to strengthen hernia repairs, certain hernia mesh products have been linked to: Infections: Mesh can become infected, leading to pain, swelling, and further complications. Chronic Pain: Many patients experience persistent pain after mesh implantation. Mesh Migration: The mesh can shift from its original position, causing damage to surrounding tissues and organs. Adhesions: The mesh can adhere to nearby organs, leading to complications and the need for corrective surgery. Mesh Failure: The mesh may fail to provide adequate support, resulting in hernia recurrence. Indiana Product Liability Law and Hernia Mesh Claims In Indiana, product liability law allows individuals to hold manufacturers accountable for defective medical devices. To pursue a hernia mesh claim, you must establish: Defective Design or Manufacturing: That the mesh was defectively designed or manufactured. Failure to Warn: That the manufacturer failed to adequately warn about the risks of complications. Causation: A direct link between the defective mesh and your injuries. Damages: The extent of your injuries and losses. Steps to Take for a Hernia Mesh Claim in Indiana Consult an Indiana Medical Device Attorney: Seek legal counsel from an attorney experienced in medical device litigation. Gather Medical Records: Collect all relevant medical records, including surgical reports, diagnoses, and treatment plans. Document Your Symptoms: Keep a detailed record of your symptoms and how they have impacted your life. Understand Indiana’s Statute of Limitations:
More Posts