More from From ChatGPT to Gemini: how AI is rewriting the internet
As James Vincent wrote about the Senate hearing last week regarding artificial intelligence, “Industry reps — primarily OpenAI CEO Sam Altman — merrily agreed on the need to regulate new AI technologies, while politicians seemed happy to hand over responsibility for drafting rules to the companies themselves.”
Altman and others from OpenAI provided more information on the kind of regulation they consider worth pursuing in this blog post, so you can read it and see if it makes any sense.
As detailed in the latest release notes and in this GIF. If you make a chart, however, you may want to double check the numbers.
As global levels of debt are rising, debt collectors are using AI to hound borrowers.
Some of the companies that stand to benefit most from AI integration are those that purely exist to collect debt. These companies, known as debt buyers, purchase “distressed” debt from other creditors at steep discounts—usually pennies on the dollar—then try as hard as they can to get debtors to repay in full. They don’t issue loans, or provide any kind of service that clients might owe them for; it’s a business model built on profiting from people who fell behind on payments to someone else.
TechCrunch did the math, and it couldn’t be more than $57.4 million, not the $100 million Musk has been claiming. OpenAI became a for-profit business after Musk stopped donating.
On this post by Elizabeth Lopatto about the question that Bard (and Bing, apparently) can’t answer: how many times does the letter e appear in ketchup?
I was dying to go “gotcha” with such a prompt after the initial question,
“Ok, what comes after the letter “k” in “ketchup”?”
and I got another interesting response from it,
“The letter “e” comes after the letter “k” in the word “ketchup”. However, there is no letter “e” in the word “ketchup”. Therefore, there is no letter after the letter “k” in the word “ketchup”.
And that’s how Bard left me speechless.
Does Bard know how many times ‘e’ appears in ‘ketchup’?
One problem with AI is that sometimes it makes mistakes, and if another AI tool uses incorrect information as training data, it can also go down the wrong path. Oops.
The smartphone maker has teamed up with the Korean technology giant Naver to develop a generative AI system exclusively for its workers, according to a report from The Korea Economic Daily.
Earlier this month, Samsung told employees to avoid using AI chatbots created by companies like OpenAI over concerns that they’ll collect and use sensitive company data to train their large language models.
If your job hasn’t banned plugging company data into an AI chatbot, then go ahead. You’ll still need to join the waitlist though — the results of our first tests from March are right here, and we also tried Bard head-to-head with Bing and ChatGPT.
We’ll see what kind of updates Google I/O brings tomorrow, but maybe it’s better to hold off writing this week’s report with the tool Google employees reportedly called “worse than useless” and “a pathological liar.”
[Google Workspace Updates]
The European Union’s fight with ChatGPT is a glance into what’s to come for AI services.
The company says it’s expanding its pool of trusted testers by “more than 10X today,” which introduces generative AI features across its Workspace apps.
Google is testing AI features in Docs and Gmail to start, allowing users to generate, summarize, or brainstorm text, as well as condense meeting notes into an email.
A paper (PDF) published by Google described the Transformer neural net architecture that is the “T” in OpenAI’s GPT, but the Washington Post reports we shouldn’t expect to see that happen again.
Now the Post says Google Research leader Jeff Dean shifted away from a previous approach of “encouraging researchers to publish academic papers prolifically.”
Instead:
Google would take advantage of its own AI discoveries, sharing papers only after the lab work had been turned into products, Dean said, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share private information.
[Washington Post]
