Yet another filler episode

Marco Almada

Marco Almada

— 6 min read
A typewriter. Out of it, comes a sheet with 'JOB APPLICATION' in all-caps.
Photo by Markus Winkler / Unsplash

Hello, dear reader, and welcome to another issue of AI, Law, and Otter Things! In recent weeks, I have not had much to share, as I have been focused on my job search and my ongoing manuscript. One of these things is out of the way now, and I will hopefully make progress with the other in the upcoming weeks, so here's hoping I get back to my usual posting rhythm. In the meantime, here's another issue on the the short side of things.

If you are somehow curious about technology-neutral regulation, next week I will give not one but two talks covering parts of my book-in-progress:

  • On Tuesday (14 April), I will be in Tilburg (and online) for a TILT Seminar. There, I will present the overall argument of the book, with a focus on how and why I believe we should emphasize the question of delegation when analysing technology neutrality.
  • On Wednesday (15 April), I will speak at the Amsterdam Law and Technology Institute (in-person only) about technology-neutral regulation, this time emphasizing its impact throughout the various moments of the policy process.

In the meantime, today's issue starts with a bit of self-reflection about my job applications and the kind of scholarship I do. After that, there is a slightly-longer-than-usual section with reading recommendations, followed by some open calls and events. Then, of course, what everybody is here for–a cute otter. Hope you enjoy!

Looking at my writing patterns

One of the most awkward parts of job applications is having to sell myself. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a particularly self-effacing person (quite the contrary, actually), but I find it difficult to find a balance between 'stating the obvious' and 'bringing relevant information to the fore'. Still, I really like the idea of having a salary in the long run, so the last few monts have seen quite a bit of self-assessment in my part.

What I'd see as the biggest challenge of my applications was how to position myself as a scholar. On the one hand, regular readers of this newsletter are probably tired of reading about how I am less and less interested in the direct engagement with technical matters. This does not mean I am no longer interested in the relationship between law and technology, but rather that I am looking at it from different perspectives. On the other hand, most of my publications until very recently deal with these 'under the hood' aspects of technology regulation, so moving too far away from that makes me less attractive as a candidate to hire. So, an important part of this application season has been to find a balance I can live with. And, although I am now comfortable with my answer, I failed miserably at conveying it in some of the interviews I took part on.

This reflection about the road ahead also led me to examine how my future interests align with the kind of scholarship I produce. As of today, I believe most (if not all) of my publications can fit into one of the three following categories:

  • Conceptual plumbing (with apologies to Mary Midgley): in this kind of publication, I engage with a theoretical concept we use, show how it is being used in somewhat sloppy ways, and propose how and why we should be different. My monograph on technology-neutral regulation is an example of that approach, as well as my earlier work on automated decision-making.
  • Interdisciplinary translation: here, I try to articulate broad readings across disciplines for one of two purposes.
    • In the first, I make the case that something that is being discussed by a particular scholarly community is relevant for another. For example, a book chapter I'm currently working on tries to show that insights from the policy learning literature can be useful for the governance of innovation.
    • In the second, I argue that an apparent convergence in terminology disguises differences in concepts. This is, for example, the main takeaway of my various works on transparency: that what the law expects from AI technologies does not line up nicely with what technical disciplines expect or aim to provide with their methods.
  • Doctrinal analysis: my approach to doctrine is heavily informed by other disciplines, but ultimately seeks to read legal texts in light of the internal logic of the legal system in which they are deployed. Maybe the clearest example of that is my article with Nicolas Petit on the AI Act, where we mobilize a variety of sources but focus on presenting the legal framework and the ensuing interpretation challenges.

As this breakdown suggests, I am pretty much interested in theory and methods of the law. I believe one cannot advance in such discussions without having a connection to what is actually going on, which is why I tend to collaborate with people from different perspectives and engage in my own doctrinal work. Even so, knowing my strengths and limitations can be useful when trying to figure out what I can bring to the table. So, doing this exercise has helped me quite a bit as I prepared for job interviews.

Recommendations

Another season of For All Mankind is now being released in weekly installments on Apple TV. As the show moves into the future, it gets sillier and sillier, especially as some of the characters from the very first season are still central to the plot. Nonetheless, it offers a much more uplifting take on the future than the dystopias that now dominate the offer of sci-fi shows.

As for professional stuff, you might want to take a look at:

Opportunities

Disclaimer: as usual, I am gathering these links purely for convenience and because I think they might be of interest to readers of this newsletter. Unless I explicitly say otherwise, I am not involved with any of the selection processes indicated below.

The 21st IFIP Summer School on Privacy and Identity Management will take place from 10 to 14 August 2026 in Leuven (Belgium) with the working theme of 'Regulation and Innovation: Catalysts or Antagonists?'. This school has an interdisicplinary outlook, combining perspectives from computer science, the social sciences, and law. Submit your extended abstract by 30 April!

The Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (the Netherlands) is hiring two assistant or associate professors in Cybersecurity. Apply by 19 April.

The São Paulo School of Advanced Science on Regulatory Governance invites applications for a 10-day course (between 3 and 13 August) on regulation in Latin America. This is a fascinating programme, and applications are due by 30 April.

PLSC-Europe will take place in Leuven this year, from 29 to 30 October 2026. They invite abstracts until 15 May.

Back to Leiden, the ICON-S Benelux Conference 2026 will take place on 26 and 27 October, with the theme 'Trust in Transition: Public Law in a Changing World'. Submit your abstract by 29 May.

The editors of RSS: Data Science and Artificial Intelligence invite submissions for an upcoming Special Issue: 'Uncertainty in the Era of AI'. Submissions are due by 30 May.

And now, the otter

A beaver swims in murky water with ripples.
Photo by Silvia H / Unsplash

Hope you found something interesting above, and please consider subscribing if you haven’t done so already:

Subscribe

Thanks for your attention! Do not hesitate to hit “reply” to this email or contact me elsewhere to discuss some topic I raise in the newsletter. Likewise, let me know if there is a job opening, event, or publication that might be of interest to me or to the readers of this newsletter. Hope to see you next time!

Read more