4 reasons why this AI Godfather thinks we shouldn’t be afraid

Don't you hate it when the godfathers disagree? 

On one side, we have former Google scientist Dr. Geoffrey Hinton warning that we're going too fast and AIs could ruin everything from jobs to truth. On the other side, we find Meta's Yann LeCun.

Both scientists once worked together on Deep Learning advancements that would change the world of AI and triggered the flurry of advancements in AI algorithms and large language models that brought us to this fraught moment.

Hinton delivered his warning earlier this year to The New York Times. Fellow Turing Award-winner LeCun largely countered Hinton and defended AI development in a wide-ranging interview with Wired's Steve Levy.

“People are exploiting the fear about the technology, and we’re running the risk of scaring people away from it,” LeCun told Levy.

LeCun's argument, which in its TLDR form is something making to, “Don't worry, embrace AI,” breaks down into a few key components that may or may not make you think differently.

Open is good

I particularly enjoyed LeCun's open-source argument. He told Levy that if you accept that AI may end up sitting between us and much of our digital experience, it doesn't make sense for a few AI powerhouse companies to control it. “You do not want that AI system to be controlled by a small number of companies on the West Coast of the US,” said LeCun.

Now, this is a guy who works as Meta's Chief AI Scientist. Meta (formerly Facebook) is a big West Coast company (which recently launched its own open-source LLM LLAMA 2). I'm sure the irony is not lost on LeCun but I think he may be targeting OpenAI. The world's leading AI purveyor (maker of ChatGPT and DALL-E, and a major contributor to Microsoft's CoPilot) started as an open and non-profit company. It's now getting a lot of funding from Microsoft (also a big West Coast company) and LeCun claims OpenAI no longer shares its research.

Regulation is probably not the thing

LeCun has been vocal on the subject of AI regulation but maybe not in the way you think. He's basically arguing against it. When Levy asked about all the damage an unregulated and all-powerful AI could do, LeCun insisted that not only are AIs built with guardrails but if these tools are used in industry, they'll have to follow pre-existing and rigid regulations (think the pharmaceutical industry).

“The question that people are debating is whether it makes sense to regulate research and development of AI. And I don't think it does,” LeCun told Wired.

AGI isn't near

There's been a lot of talk in recent months about the potential for Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), which may or may not be much like your own intelligence. Some, including OpenAI's Sam Altman, believe it's on the near horizon. LeCun, though is not one of them.

He argued that we can't even define AGI because human intelligence is not one thing. He has a point there. My intelligence would not be in any way comparable to Einstein's or LeCun's.

You want AI to be smarter than you

There's little question in LeCun's view that AIs will eventually be smarter than humans but he also notes that they will lack the same motivations as us. 

He likens these AI assistants to 'super-smart humans” and added working with them might be like working with super-smart colleagues.

Even with all that intelligence, LeCun insists that these AIs won't have human-like motivations and drives. Global Domination won't be a thing for them simply because they're smarter than us. 

LeCun doesn't discount the idea of programming in a drive (a superseding goal) but sees that as “objective-driven AI” and since part of that objective could be an unbreachable guardrail, the safeguards will be baked in.

Do I feel better? Is less regulation, more open source, and a firmer embrace of AI mediation the path forward to a safer future? Maybe. LeCun certainly thinks so. Wonder if he's spoken to Hinton lately.

You might also like

TechRadar – All the latest technology news

Read More

Why am I so afraid of Elon Musk and editable tweets?

Twitter will, in the not too distant future, let you edit Tweets. That news, which arrived a few days ago, was momentous enough, but felt more like the shocking aftertaste you get from hard candy with a sour middle – that's because we were still digesting the one-two-punch news of Elon Musk buying 10% interest in the company and quickly joining Twitter's board.

This was a lot to take in. 

Understand that I've been using the social network for 15 years. It's only been around for 16 years. Through all the changes, including the launch of a mobile app, the introduction of images, retweets, mentions and threads, doubling the lengths of tweets and the launch of a subscription service, there has never been a week like this.

Twitter has been a sort of de facto record of the early 21st century, with billions of posts, capturing tiny events and big moments, traveling around the world faster than a SpaceX rocket can escape the Earth's gravity.

The only way to change that record has been to delete it; or rather, delete tweets. If you think of Twitter as a personal publishing system (we used to call it a micro-blogging platform), this makes sense. Websites have always given us the ability to add, edit, and remove content. Media sites regularly delete vast quantities of material, mostly to fix search engine optimization issues.

On Twitter, though, most of us never delete our tweets. I do it when there's an embarrassing, egregious error – a wrong or broken link, or a massive typo. Even then, there are times when I lose control of the tweet – it goes a little viral – and removing it might upset hundreds or thousands of people who liked or shared it.

So I leave it, and dream, once again, of the edit button.

Elon Musk

(Image credit: Getty Images / Jim Watson)

I should be happy for Twitter and myself.

It just got a huge cash infusion and vote of confidence from a new part-owner (and from the stock market, which liked the news), and I have confirmation that, after years of pleading, I will in the not-too-distant future, be able to edit my Tweets.

So why am I so anxious?

First, there's the Elon Musk factor.

I've been an avid Musk watcher for years. I first interviewed him in 2012 and eventually created a short-lived, daily Musk-watching podcast called 33 Million Miles to Mars. I understand the guy, and think nothing better captured his genius and surprisingly emotional personality than this 2017 Rolling Stone profile.

It's also pretty easy to see Musk's personality on Twitter, a platform he loves and hates in equal measure. He's been on it for years, and often uses it as his visible ID (and ego), letting loose with silliness, abrasiveness, pique, and insight. I've had, on Twitter a few really interesting conversations with him about Tesla's technology.

Musk cares about Twitter, but he also seems inclined to burn it to the ground; it's clear that he has no intention of being a silent partner. Former CEO and Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey admitted as much when he called the current Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal and Musk “a team.”

Viewed as an agent of change, Musk's arrival on the Twitter board could be welcomed with excitement. What will he inspire? What will he demand? What might he carelessly share about Twitter's future plans on Twitter?

Adding Musk to the board is not like bringing on anyone else. He is one of the most recognizable people in the world and a polarizing figure. For every fan of his triumphs in the EV and space sector, there are people who believe him a dangerous, self-aggrandizing showboat. My take is that Musk is a true genius (he taught himself rocket science) with an underdeveloped emotional core.

Shortly after announcing his stock buy, and true to form, Musk took to Twitter and ran a poll on whether Twitter should introduce editable Tweets. More than four million people voted, with 73% saying yes (or “yse” as his tweet comically put it).

See more

Knowing Musk as I do, I was still processing his big move when Twitter shocked me, and its 300 million-plus other devoted Twitter users, with news that it's currently working on editable tweets. The company insisted that it had been working on the feature for months prior to Musk joining the board.

Sure. Okay.

Instead of being thrilled, though, I felt a new wave of anxiety. Saying “editable tweets” is one thing – implementing the feature in a way that doesn't destabilize Twitter to the point of uselessness is another.

I immediately wondered if I'd be using it to go back and fix silly errors, or a structural problem on my single most viral tweet. I'm not jumping to do it, because the more I think about editing tweets, the more I realize it's not about rewriting history (I pray it's not); it's about fixing of-the-moment errors. Silly things like typos, and bigger things like where you angry-tweet one minute, and realize five minutes later that you can tone it down and not incite a Twitter riot.

My concern meter dialed back a bit after Jay Sullivan, Twitter's Head of Consumer Product, offered a few more details about how Twitter might approach the biggest change to its platform in a decade.

He noted that Twitter knows people want to fix “(sometimes embarrassing) mistakes, typos and hot takes in the moment,” but more crucially added, “Without things like time limits, controls, and transparency about what has been edited, Edit could be misused to alter the record of the public conversation. Protecting the integrity of that public conversation is our top priority when we approach this work.”

Personally, I hope this means that I won't be able to go back five years and tweak my viral tweet, that we'll have change histories, and that historically significant Tweets can't be altered at any time. That last point is a bigger ask, I know, and may relate to who is tweeting. Public figures might be stuck with policy tweets, and only be able to access the editable tweet feature in the first 10 minutes after posting. Unverified and non-public figures might be given more time.

This would be reasonable, but even as I write this, I feel Musk's stare. He has thoughts on this, I'm sure, and could push for more extensive and free-wheeling editable tweet settings, especially some that could help him go back and change everything and anything in his Twitter timeline.

Still, Musk is also a savvy businessman, and could not have built and maintained multiple businesses, especially the successful Tesla and SpaceX, without having exercised some restraint. I have to believe that Musk will show restraint here; otherwise… well, I'll just leave a Musk recent tweet right here.

See more

TechRadar – All the latest technology news

Read More

Why am I so afraid of Elon Musk and editable tweets?

Twitter will, in the not too distant future, let you edit Tweets. That news, which arrived a few days ago, was momentous enough, but felt more like the shocking aftertaste you get from hard candy with a sour middle – that's because we were still digesting the one-two-punch news of Elon Musk buying 10% interest in the company and quickly joining Twitter's board.

This was a lot to take in. 

Understand that I've been using the social network for 15 years. It's only been around for 16 years. Through all the changes, including the launch of a mobile app, the introduction of images, retweets, mentions and threads, doubling the lengths of tweets and the launch of a subscription service, there has never been a week like this.

Twitter has been a sort of de facto record of the early 21st century, with billions of posts, capturing tiny events and big moments, traveling around the world faster than a SpaceX rocket can escape the Earth's gravity.

The only way to change that record has been to delete it; or rather, delete tweets. If you think of Twitter as a personal publishing system (we used to call it a micro-blogging platform), this makes sense. Websites have always given us the ability to add, edit, and remove content. Media sites regularly delete vast quantities of material, mostly to fix search engine optimization issues.

On Twitter, though, most of us never delete our tweets. I do it when there's an embarrassing, egregious error – a wrong or broken link, or a massive typo. Even then, there are times when I lose control of the tweet – it goes a little viral – and removing it might upset hundreds or thousands of people who liked or shared it.

So I leave it, and dream, once again, of the edit button.

Elon Musk

(Image credit: Getty Images / Jim Watson)

I should be happy for Twitter and myself.

It just got a huge cash infusion and vote of confidence from a new part-owner (and from the stock market, which liked the news), and I have confirmation that, after years of pleading, I will in the not-too-distant future, be able to edit my Tweets.

So why am I so anxious?

First, there's the Elon Musk factor.

I've been an avid Musk watcher for years. I first interviewed him in 2012 and eventually created a short-lived, daily Musk-watching podcast called 33 Million Miles to Mars. I understand the guy, and think nothing better captured his genius and surprisingly emotional personality than this 2017 Rolling Stone profile.

It's also pretty easy to see Musk's personality on Twitter, a platform he loves and hates in equal measure. He's been on it for years, and often uses it as his visible ID (and ego), letting loose with silliness, abrasiveness, pique, and insight. I've had, on Twitter a few really interesting conversations with him about Tesla's technology.

Musk cares about Twitter, but he also seems inclined to burn it to the ground; it's clear that he has no intention of being a silent partner. Former CEO and Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey admitted as much when he called the current Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal and Musk “a team.”

Viewed as an agent of change, Musk's arrival on the Twitter board could be welcomed with excitement. What will he inspire? What will he demand? What might he carelessly share about Twitter's future plans on Twitter?

Adding Musk to the board is not like bringing on anyone else. He is one of the most recognizable people in the world and a polarizing figure. For every fan of his triumphs in the EV and space sector, there are people who believe him a dangerous, self-aggrandizing showboat. My take is that Musk is a true genius (he taught himself rocket science) with an underdeveloped emotional core.

Shortly after announcing his stock buy, and true to form, Musk took to Twitter and ran a poll on whether Twitter should introduce editable Tweets. More than four million people voted, with 73% saying yes (or “yse” as his tweet comically put it).

See more

Knowing Musk as I do, I was still processing his big move when Twitter shocked me, and its 300 million-plus other devoted Twitter users, with news that it's currently working on editable tweets. The company insisted that it had been working on the feature for months prior to Musk joining the board.

Sure. Okay.

Instead of being thrilled, though, I felt a new wave of anxiety. Saying “editable tweets” is one thing – implementing the feature in a way that doesn't destabilize Twitter to the point of uselessness is another.

I immediately wondered if I'd be using it to go back and fix silly errors, or a structural problem on my single most viral tweet. I'm not jumping to do it, because the more I think about editing tweets, the more I realize it's not about rewriting history (I pray it's not); it's about fixing of-the-moment errors. Silly things like typos, and bigger things like where you angry-tweet one minute, and realize five minutes later that you can tone it down and not incite a Twitter riot.

My concern meter dialed back a bit after Jay Sullivan, Twitter's Head of Consumer Product, offered a few more details about how Twitter might approach the biggest change to its platform in a decade.

He noted that Twitter knows people want to fix “(sometimes embarrassing) mistakes, typos and hot takes in the moment,” but more crucially added, “Without things like time limits, controls, and transparency about what has been edited, Edit could be misused to alter the record of the public conversation. Protecting the integrity of that public conversation is our top priority when we approach this work.”

Personally, I hope this means that I won't be able to go back five years and tweak my viral tweet, that we'll have change histories, and that historically significant Tweets can't be altered at any time. That last point is a bigger ask, I know, and may relate to who is tweeting. Public figures might be stuck with policy tweets, and only be able to access the editable tweet feature in the first 10 minutes after posting. Unverified and non-public figures might be given more time.

This would be reasonable, but even as I write this, I feel Musk's stare. He has thoughts on this, I'm sure, and could push for more extensive and free-wheeling editable tweet settings, especially some that could help him go back and change everything and anything in his Twitter timeline.

Still, Musk is also a savvy businessman, and could not have built and maintained multiple businesses, especially the successful Tesla and SpaceX, without having exercised some restraint. I have to believe that Musk will show restraint here; otherwise… well, I'll just leave a Musk recent tweet right here.

See more

TechRadar – All the latest technology news

Read More

Why Slack isn’t afraid of Microsoft Teams or any other competitor

There is a pleasing circularity to the recent career of Pip White, who in November took on the role of SVP & General Manager EMEA at collaboration software company Slack.

Previously, White had spent a number of years running the sales operation at CRM titan Salesforce, before departing for a job at Google’s cloud arm. In the summer of 2021, Salesforce finalized an acquisition of Slack worth $ 28 billion, and now White finds herself in familiar company.

A few months into her new role, TechRadar Pro spoke to White about Slack’s ambitions for the coming year, with the pandemic continuing to confine many workers to their home offices.

The official party line goes a little something like this: Slack is the only viable digital headquarters for the hybrid working era, wherein we will all work in a fluid and asynchronous manner from a variety of locations. It’s a message we’ve heard many times over by now.

However, White also offered insight into the nature of the company’s relationship with its new parent organization, as well as the way it perceives its competition in the collaboration sector.

Slackforce

Asked why she traded in her position at Google Cloud for one at Slack, White explained that the acquisition by Salesforce played a large part, as did the platform’s role in the evolution of work.

“The opportunity to lead Slack in EMEA was a compelling one, especially in the context of the integration into Salesforce and the doors that has opened from an existing customer and growth perspective,” she explained.

“It was also about where we are in the world right now, in terms of the way people are thinking about different ways of working. Slack presents a really interesting opportunity at the forefront of that transformation.”

Having rolled out Slack internally prior to the acquisition, Salesforce was already equipped with a “really good feel for the technology”, White told us. And in future, the new parent company will help guide product development, as well as pursuing opportunities relating to the integration of Slack and Salesforce products.

Slack Hybrid Working

(Image credit: Slack)

Slack founder and CEO Stuart Butterfield now reports in to Bret Taylor, who was recently appointed co-CEO at Salesforce. White describes this relationship as a “tight connection and collaboration” from a product perspective.

“It’s a case of collaboration, not of Salesforce taking over, or vice versa,” said White. “It’s about what’s in the best interests of our customers and how we can help them on this hybrid working journey.”

“Slack will be central to minimizing disruption and accelerating the opportunity for collaboration in this new digital economy, and even more so as a result of the new use cases we’ve been exploring since the acquisition.”

This may well prove to be the case, but Slack will first have to see off increasingly stiff competition from a number of directions.

What competition?

As a result of the pandemic and shift to remote working, the collaboration and video conferencing market has never been hotter, nor more competitive. According to a recent survey from Gartner, there has been a 44% rise in the use of collaboration tools since 2019.

These kinds of services have also become increasingly amorphous over the last couple of years, as the largest players continue to borrow features and design concepts from one another. In a venn diagram that maps out functionality, platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Slack and others would overlap significantly.

However, White doesn’t accept the notion that Slack can be easily compared with other services, nor that the platform faces serious competition. Asked specifically about the rivalry between Slack and Microsoft Teams, she told us: “it’s not necessarily an apples to apples comparison”.

This felt a touch disingenuous, given the commonalities between the two services; both offer text chat, group channels, audio calls, file sharing and integrations with third-party apps. In our mind, someone could be forgiven for thinking Slack and Teams are fruit of much the same tree.

“It’s not necessarily an apples to apples comparison.”

Pip White, Slack

In 2020, Slack also filed an antitrust complaint against Microsoft over the bundling together of Teams and Office 365 services, which the company says amounts to an unfair advantage. Both White and Slack’s communications agency refused to be drawn into discussing the legal dispute, which is yet to be resolved, but its existence implies there is rivalry there.

Nonetheless, White is ardent that Slack offers a unique value proposition, courtesy of its push towards asynchronous collaboration, short and spontaneous huddles in place of time-hungry meetings, and rich third-party integrations.

“We will continue to innovate around these themes,” she told us. “All employers are thinking about how to approach cultural shifts and flux in the working environment; a lot of employees want different things.”

“The situation is going to continue to evolve, so it’s about anticipating change and being supremely flexible. Technologies that allow for asynchronous working away from the physical office will enable that journey.”

An automated future

Regardless of whether Slack faces direct opposition from services like Teams, however, the company obviously has a clear vision for the future of its software.

As announced in mid-November, Slack has “rebuilt and reengineered” large parts of the platform from the ground up. The main improvement is the introduction of a library of “building blocks” to the Slack Workflow Builder, which make it simpler to develop automations that eliminate the need to juggle many different business apps.

Building these automations requires no coding whatsoever; the Lego-like blocks can be chained together via a simple drag-and-drop mechanism, which means workers don’t have to rely on overburdened developer teams to code-in new functionality.

Slack

(Image credit: Slack)

If there is no available building block that fulfils a particular task, a developer can step in to create one on an employee’s behalf. This new block will then become available across the organization and can be “remixed” into various other workflows.

According to White, customers are beginning to utilize this and other new functionality to great effect, in ways that are not possible on any other platform.

“We see the ability to bring work into channel as a key differentiator for us. The way in which most of our customers are starting to use Slack in anger, so to speak, is all about the ability to collaborate endlessly from one process to another,” she said.

“We’re only beginning to see the start of changes to ways of working. A lot has changed in some sectors and digital transformation has undoubtedly been accelerated, but we’re still at the start of this journey. I think it’s a great opportunity for all of us to reconsider the ways in which we work.”

TechRadar – All the latest technology news

Read More