#Apple#iPad#AI#GenerativeAI#Marketing: "Smartphones and tablets were invented to enhance our lived experience, to make it easier to leave the house and go to the beach and meet up with friends — just a good camera-computer combo that fits in your pocket.
Theoretically, our phones and tablets will become even more useful with AI, serving as virtual assistants that can do all the boring stuff we don’t want to, like summarizing all your new emails and filtering out junk. There’s a world in the not too distant future, according to AI proponents, where you can simply tell Siri or Google “order my usual breakfast from the coffee shop near the office, I’ll be there in 10 minutes to pick it up,” and the bot will do just that.
We’re not there yet, however. And so far, the consumer applications for AI are simultaneously underwhelming and dystopian.
Distorted images may be harmless social media fodder, until they become propaganda spread by bad actors."
#AI#GenerativeAI#HumanRights: "You point out that AI isn’t just some benign cloud floating above our heads. It’s based on material extraction and the exploitation of workers, mainly in the global south, and it’s incredibly polluting to run. But so much of this is hidden from view. How do we go about tackling these impacts?
It is a huge question. One way of dealing with it is by looking at the question of AI adoption from an ESG [environmental, social and governance] perspective. All of the equipment that we use, the phones that we’re talking on now, are built from minerals often taken from conflict regions, including with child labour. Being aware of that hopefully can help shift societal demands and consumer habits. You can use generative AI to make a hilarious meme, but how much water and energy are you expending? Couldn’t you just pick up a pencil, and might that actually be more satisfying?
Do you sometimes wish that AI could be put back on the shelf?
It’s not an all-or-nothing equation between banning AI or embracing it into every aspect of your life. It’s a question of choosing what we want to use AI for. Being critical and asking questions doesn’t mean that you’re against AI: it just means you’re against AI hype."
I think people underestimate what the impact will be of an AI companion, at the current GPT4 level , that you can talk with without a lag of several seconds, that you can personalise, that has memory etc. GPT5 isn't necessary to change the landscape and impact of AI. #AI#ChatGPT#Chatbot
OpenAI closed the deal with Apple, the next Siri will probably be powered by OpenAI. Not a coincidence i think the deal was closed before the pressconference from OpenAI today about it's product updates.
Also Google I/O is tomorrow, it's a busy week for AI. #Apple#OpenAI#Siri#ChatGPT#AI
"Hi there! It seems like you're trying to write something slightly more difficult than what you're really capable of. I'll sit here and make passive aggressive comments about your non-American spelling and the passive voice until you realise that you're probably not as good a writer as you seem to think you are."
It was like writing with your Mother making helpful suggestions.
That is 1 good interview with @Mer__edith at #zib2 / ORF pointing out all the perils and side effects, wrong assumptions and promises of giving up #privacy in exchange for more security.
Also: the risk of putting ourselves into full dependency of tech giants. There is a notion that #AI - which resources are controlled by a few companies - will spread so widely and quickly that no one can prevent it. This is dangerous, stupid and not even necessary.
Futurism wanted to know: What kind of a company creates fake authors for a newspaper or magazine and operates them like sock puppets? What they discovered "should alarm anyone who cares about a trustworthy and ethical media industry." https://flip.it/oxcxAC #Tech#Technology#AI#Journalism
In this week’s Disconnect Roundup, Apple delivered an insult to life itself by crushing all human creativity into an iPad Pro in its recent ad. Plus, recommended reads, labor updates, and other news you might have missed.
“Mario Fusco, a great software developer, once said: ‘The code you write makes you a programmer. The code you delete makes you a good one. The code you don’t have to write makes you a great one.’ So maybe, for once, AI is on to something.”
We have an exciting main event at #HCXAI at #chi2024 today!
We have @janethaven from @datasociety and
Kush Varshney from @ibmresearch for an invigorating discussion on AI governance and policymaking to take Explainable AI beyond academia.
What if any Fediverse instance's make this DRM that Facebook has, with posts being locked for users not signed in. This can help with those who are scared of AI “taking over” because let's be real, AI just grabs the information you post online. If we do this, would AI “die”?
I don't personally care so to speak, as AI will not care, or sorry, these companies developing the AI LLM's will counter new strategies to obtain PII from websites.
Imagine an AI haiku writing program and a master haiku artist.
The artist works with meaning and intent. Some things are popular, some not, but everything was chosen to communicate something.
The AI is matching words that frequently go together, has no concept of meaning, and spews high speed gibberish. BUT, the people who vote up or down on results are selecting works that seem like they could be 'deep'.
Given the top 5 from both, could you tell the difference?
Eine sehr gute Toot-Reihe von @bkastl über das kommerzielle Ausnutzen der kostenlosen Inputs von User*innen auf Stack Overflow über ChatGPT von OpenAI:
#AI#GenerativeAI#AIRegulation#TechPolicy: "The overwhelming message that emerges from these books, ironic as it may seem, is a newfound appreciation of the collective powers of human creativity. We rightly marvel at the wonders of AI, but still more astonishing are the capabilities of the human brain, which weighs 1.4kg and consumes just 25 watts of power. For good reason, it has been called the most complex organism in the known universe.
As the authors admit, humans are also deeply flawed and capable of great stupidity and perverse cruelty. For that reason, the technologically evangelical wing of Silicon Valley actively welcomes the ascent of AI, believing that machine intelligence will soon supersede the human kind and lead to a more rational and harmonious universe. But fallibility may, paradoxically, be inextricably intertwined with intelligence. As the computer pioneer Alan Turing noted, “If a machine is expected to be infallible, it cannot also be intelligent.” How intelligent do we want our machines to be?"
#AI#GenerativeAI#Police#Surveillance: "Moreover, if the AI-generated report is incorrect, can we trust police will contradict that version of events if it's in their interest to maintain inaccuracies? On the flip side, might AI report writing go the way of AI-enhanced body cameras? In other words, if the report consistently produces a narrative from audio that police do not like, will they edit it, scrap it, or discontinue using the software altogether?
And what of external reviewers’ ability to access these reports? Given police departments’ overly intense secrecy, combined with a frequent failure to comply with public records laws, how can the public, or any external agency, be able to independently verify or audit these AI-assisted reports? And how will external reviewers know which portions of the report are generated by AI vs. a human?
Police reports, skewed and biased as they often are, codify the police department’s memory. They reveal not necessarily what happened during a specific incident, but what police imagined to have happened, in good faith or not. Policing, with its legal power to kill, detain, or ultimately deny people’s freedom, is too powerful an institution to outsource its memory-making to technologies in a way that makes officers immune to critique, transparency, or accountability." https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/05/what-can-go-wrong-when-police-use-ai-write-reports
#AI#GenerativeAI#Chatbots#HR#JobMarket: "Job seekers, frustrated with corporate hiring software, are using artificial intelligence to craft cover letters and résumés in seconds, and deploying new automated bots to robo-apply for hundreds of jobs in just a few clicks. In response, companies are deploying more bots of their own to sort through the oceans of applications.
The result: a bot versus bot war that’s leaving both applicants and employers irritated and has made the chances of landing an interview, much less a job, even slimmer than before.
“You’re fighting AI with AI,” said Brad Rager, chief executive of Crux, a recruiting firm that matches cybersecurity specialists with employers.
The AI arms race is bad for job candidates, he said, who feel defeated when online applications come to nothing, and for employers, who are frustrated when imprecise AI tools highlight weak candidates. “There’s so much promise, but there’s a lot of crap and garbage,” Rager said of the tools used by employers."