Reading an article published today in the New York Times I started feeling sick in the first sentences. The title of the article is “MTV's 'Super Sweet 16' Gives a Sour Pleasure†and the reality show it talks about is not unbelievable but rather is just in real bad taste.
After having seen so many pictures of the so far hidden poverty in New Orleans and comparing it to this show which shows rich kids spending ridiculous amounts of money on a birthday party it makes you feel sick.
It seems pretty unreal when you think that there are discrete lobby companies that do everything they can to dissuade people from talking about the massive difference there is between the absurdly rich and the underlying deep poverty in the US.
What could be more absurd, well supposedly the show is pretty successful !
The article refers to this article in TIME magazine where Cox says :
What used to mark the end of childhood now seems only an excuse to prolong the whiny, self-centered greediness that gives infantile a bad name.
From the Hughes film “Sixteen Candles†which had it's ups and downs but was enjoyable, we now get a depressing painting of the US in sixteen shades of greed from MTV !
I question the reliability and accuracy of Generative AI (GenAI) in enterprise scenarios, particularly when faced with adversarial questions, highlighting that current Large Language Models (LLMs) may be data-rich but lack in reasoning and causality. I would call for a more balanced approach to AI adoption in cases of assisting users, requiring supervision, and the need for better LLM models that can be trusted, learn, and reason.
I discuss my experience with chatbots, contrasting older rules-based systems with newer GenAI (General Artificial Intelligence) chatbots. We cannot dismiss the creative capabilities of GenAI-based chatbots, but these systems lack reliability, especially in customer-facing applications, and improvements in the way AI is structured could lead to a "software renaissance," potentially reducing society's technical debt.
The article discusses the contrasting debate on how AI safety is and should be managed, its impact on technical debt, and its societal implications.
It notes the Center for AI Safety's call for a worldwide focus on the risks of AI, and Meredith Whittaker's criticism that such warnings preserve the status quo, strengthening tech giants' dominance. The piece also highlights AI's potential to decrease societal and technical debt by making software production cheaper, simpler, and resulting in far more innovation. It provides examples of cost-effective open-source models that perform well and emphasizes the rapid pace of AI innovation. Last, the article emphasises the need for adaptive legislation to match the pace of AI innovation, empowering suitable government entities for oversight, defining appropriate scopes for legislation and regulation, addressing ethical issues and biases in AI, and promoting public engagement in AI regulatory decisions.
Japan has made its ruling on the situation between Content creators and Businesses. Japanese companies that use AI have the freedom to use content for training purposes without the burden of copyright laws. This news about the copyright laws in Japan reported over at Technomancers is seen as Businesses: 1 / Content Creators: 0 The […]