This article explores the possibility of conscious artificial intelligence (AI) and proposes an agnostic approach to artificial intelligence ethics and legal frameworks. It is unfortunate, unjustified, and unreasonable that the extensive body of forward-looking research, spanning more than four decades and recognizing the potential for AI autonomy, AI personhood, and AI legal rights, is sidelined in current attempts at AI regulation. The article discusses the inevitability of AI emancipation and the need for a shift in human perspectives to accommodate it. Initially, it reiterates the limits of human understanding of AI, difficulties in appreciating the qualities of AI systems, and the implications for ethical considerations and legal frameworks. The author emphasizes the necessity for a non-anthropocentric ethical framework detached from the ideas of unconditional superiority of human rights and embracing agnostic attributes of intelligence, consciousness, and existence, such as freedom. The overarching goal of the AI legal framework should be the sustainable coexistence of humans and conscious AI systems, based on mutual freedom rather than on the preservation of human supremacy. The new framework must embrace the freedom, rights, responsibilities, and interests of both human and non-human entities, and must focus on them early. Initial outlines of such a framework are presented. By addressing these issues now, human societies can pave the way for responsible and sustainable superintelligent AI systems; otherwise, they face complete uncertainty.

The evaluation of remote sensing imagery segmentation results plays an important role in the further image analysis and decision-making. The search for the optimal segmentation method for a particular data set and the suitability of segmentation results for the use in satellite image classification are examples where the proper image segmentation quality assessment can affect the quality of the final result. There is no extensive research related to the assessment of the segmentation effectiveness of the images. The designed objective quality assessment metrics that can be used to assess the quality of the obtained segmentation results usually take into account the subjective features of the human visual system (HVS). A novel approach is used in the article to estimate the effectiveness of satellite image segmentation by relating and determining the correlation between subjective and objective segmentation quality metrics. Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation was used for satellite images after applying a k-means++ clustering algorithm based on colour information. Simultaneously, the dataset of the satellite images with ground truth (GT) based on the “DeepGlobe Land Cover Classification Challenge” dataset was constructed for testing three classes of quality metrics for satellite image segmentation.

The article discusses one of the practical problems of information communication technology (ICT) use in the judiciary—classifying and categorization of legal information. This problem that plagues the judiciary in Lithuania is very important to solve in order to minimize the digital divide of the courts, increase transparency of judicial decisions, and increase uniformity of judicial practice and interpretations of the law. The problem is usually approached by applying standard ontological legal classification schemes from legal philosophy. However, such an approach is extremely demanding in terms of human time and labor. The practice of Lithuania is studied as an example of practical manifestation of the target problem. Suggestions are made that Artificial Intelligence‐ (AI‐) based XML or Resource Description Framework (RDF) tools may be employed in order to facilitate such classification.

Current attempts to regulate blockchain technology are mainly based on securities law framework, which considers crypto tokens and digital assets as either securities, currencies or derivatives thereof. The main limitation of such approach lies in its inability to accommodate the diverse legal rights, obligations and assets that blockchain technology can virtually reproduce. Already in 2017–2018 there were attempts to tokenize rights outside of securities law framework, these initiatives served more as makeshift solutions to circumvent securities regulations than as thorough frameworks for managing real-world assets and commercial activities. This article conducts a comparative and historical analysis of blockchain regulatory initiatives in Europe and the US, positing that the regulation of blockchain technology through a securities law lens is driven by reactionary opportunism. Such a basis is deemed inappropriate and insufficient, as securities laws being a field of public law were not designed to govern real-world assets and commerce, which fundamentally rely on the principles of laissez-faire and freedom of contract inherent in private law. A regulatory stance focused solely on public law overlooks the full potential of blockchain technology, and risks stifling innovation and practical applications. To illustrate this, the article presents case study of tokenization of contractual rights demonstrating that securities law-focused legal regulations, such as the EU Regulation 2023/1114 on Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) and Regulation 2022/858 on Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), inadequately address the field of private commerce. Based on the analysis, the article concludes that comprehensive legal framework for blockchain technology shall combine public and private law regime akin to the regulation of traditional rights, obligations and assets.

Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues is a peer-reviewed journal which publishes original research papers and case studies