artificial intelligence

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      What if the A.I. Boosters Are Wrong?

      by

      A skeptical paper by Daron Acemoglu, a labor economist at M.I.T., has triggered a heated debate over whether artificial intelligence will supercharge productivity.Despite the advent of personal computers, the internet and other high-tech innovations, much of the industrialized world is stuck in an economic growth slump, with O.E.C.D. countries expected to expand on aggregate just 1.7 percent this year. Economists sometimes call this phenomenon the productivity paradox.The big new hope is that artificial intelligence will snap this mediocrity streak — but doubts are creeping in. And one especially skeptical paper by Daron Acemoglu, a labor economist at M.I.T., has triggered a heated debate.Acemoglu concluded that A.I. would contribute only “modest” improvement to worker productivity, and that it would add no more than 1 percent to U.S. economic output over the next decade. That pales in comparison to estimates by Goldman Sachs economists, who predicted last year that generative A.I. could raise global G.D.P. by 7 percent over the same period.The bullish camp has great hopes for A.I. Sam Altman of the ChatGPT maker OpenAI sees A.I. wiping out poverty. Jensen Huang, the C.E.O. of Nvidia, the dominant maker of the chips used to power A.I., says the technology has ushered in “the next industrial revolution.”But if the boosters are wrong, it could be trouble for the developed world, which is in desperate need of a productivity breakthrough as its work force ages and declines.A.I. won’t reverse stagnation, Acemoglu told DealBook. One reason: The technology can automate only about 5 percent of an office worker’s tasks, he found. “A.I. has much more to offer to help with the productivity problem. But it will not do that on its current path, that’s why I’m so troubled by the hype,” he said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 63 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      How A.I. Imitates Restaurant Reviews

      by

      A new study showed people real restaurant reviews and ones produced by A.I. They couldn’t tell the difference.The White Clam Pizza at Frank Pepe Pizzeria Napoletana in New Haven, Conn., is a revelation. The crust, kissed by the intense heat of the coal-fired oven, achieves a perfect balance of crispness and chew. Topped with freshly shucked clams, garlic, oregano and a dusting of grated cheese, it is a testament to the magic that simple, high-quality ingredients can conjure.Sound like me? It’s not. The entire paragraph, except the pizzeria’s name and the city, was generated by GPT-4 in response to a simple prompt asking for a restaurant critique in the style of Pete Wells.I have a few quibbles. I would never pronounce any food a revelation, or describe heat as a kiss. I don’t believe in magic, and rarely call anything perfect without using “nearly” or some other hedge. But these lazy descriptors are so common in food writing that I imagine many readers barely notice them. I’m unusually attuned to them because whenever I commit a cliché in my copy, I get boxed on the ears by my editor.He wouldn’t be fooled by the counterfeit Pete. Neither would I. But as much as it pains me to admit, I’d guess that many people would say it’s a four-star fake.The person responsible for Phony Me is Balazs Kovacs, a professor of organizational behavior at Yale School of Management. In a recent study, he fed a large batch of Yelp reviews to GPT-4, the technology behind ChatGPT, and asked it to imitate them. His test subjects — people — could not tell the difference between genuine reviews and those churned out by artificial intelligence. In fact, they were more likely to think the A.I. reviews were real. (The phenomenon of computer-generated fakes that are more convincing than the real thing is so well known that there’s a name for it: A.I. hyperrealism.)Dr. Kovacs’s study belongs to a growing body of research suggesting that the latest versions of generative A.I. can pass the Turing test, a scientifically fuzzy but culturally resonant standard. When a computer can dupe us into believing that language it spits out was written by a human, we say it has passed the Turing test.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      260 McNuggets? McDonald’s Ends A.I. Drive-Through Tests Amid Errors

      by

      Ordering mistakes frustrated customers during nearly three years of tests. But competitors like White Castle and Wendy’s say their A.I. ordering systems have been highly accurate.In the nearly three years since McDonald’s announced that it was partnering with IBM to develop a drive-through order taker powered by artificial intelligence, videos popped up on social media showing confused and frustrated customers trying to correct comically inaccurate meals.“Stop! Stop! Stop!” two friends screamed with humorous anguish on a TikTok video as an A.I. drive-through misunderstands their order, tallying up 240, 250 and then 260 Chicken McNuggets.In other videos, the A.I. rings up a customer for nine iced teas instead of one, fails to explain why a customer could not order Mountain Dew and thought another wanted to add bacon to his ice cream.So when McDonald’s announced in a June 13 internal email, obtained by the trade publication Restaurant Business, that it was ending its partnership with IBM and shutting down its A.I. tests at more than 100 U.S. drive-throughs, customers who had interacted with the service were probably not shocked.The decision to abandon the IBM deal comes as many other businesses, including its competitors, are investing in A.I. But it exemplifies some of the challenges companies are facing as they jockey to unlock the revolutionary technology’s potential.Other fast-food companies have had success with A.I. ordering. Last year, Wendy’s formed a partnership with Google Cloud to build out its A.I. drive-through system. Carl’s Jr. and Taco John’s have hired Presto, a voice A.I. firm for restaurants. Panda Express has approximately 30 automated order takers at its windows through a partnership with the voice A.I. firm SoundHound AI.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Target Tests an A.I. Tool to Help Its Workers Aid Shoppers

      by

      The retailer is rolling out a chatbot to help workers answer questions from shoppers — and workers.Target is the latest retailer to put generative artificial intelligence tools in the hands of its workers, with the goal of improving the in-store experience for employees and shoppers.On Thursday, the retailer said it had built a chatbot, called Store Companion, that would appear as an app on a store worker’s hand-held device. The chatbot can provide guidance on tasks like rebooting a cash register or enrolling a customer in the retailer’s loyalty program. The idea is to give workers “confidence to serve our guests,” Brett Craig, Target’s chief information officer, said in an interview.Target is testing the device in 400 stores and plans to make the app available to most workers across its nearly 2,000 locations by August.As the retail industry experiments with generative A.I., some see its potential to eventually make in-store shopping feel more like online shopping, said Roy Singh, the global head of Bain & Co’s advanced analytics practice who works with retailers on generative A.I. initiatives.Retailers have personalized online shopping for customers with things like predictive technology, which suggests items to buy. Shoppers also see e-commerce as more convenient than having to walk in a store and track down workers. The Target app is meant to help workers assist shoppers with their questions faster.Mr. Craig is often asked if these sorts of tools will replace workers, he said. “I believe the relationship between people and technology is so very important,” he said. “We’re here to make sure that they get the right tools to do their work.”Walmart recently expanded access to the A.I. tool it had started using in its corporate offices last summer for use in its retail stores, rolling it out to 13,000 managers of its Sam’s Club stores.While there is significant investment and hype around generative A.I., some retailers have also rolled back experiments with the technology that have failed.“We are still in that growth curve — learning, failing and relearning — and trying to get through adoption at scale,” said Duleep Rodrigo, who leads the U.S. consumer and retail sector for KPMG. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Mistral, a French A.I. Start-Up, Is Valued at $6.2 Billion

      by

      Created by alumni from Meta and Google, Mistral is just a year old and has already raised more than $1 billion from investors, leading to eye-popping valuations.Mistral, a French artificial intelligence start-up, said on Tuesday that it had raised 600 million euros, or about $640 million, from investors, a sign of robust interest in a company seen as Europe’s most promising rival to OpenAI and other Silicon Valley A.I. developers.Mistral is now valued at €5.8 billion, according to a person familiar with the investment, an eye-popping sum for a company founded just one year ago by alumni from Meta and Google. The company’s valuation has roughly tripled since December when it raised €385 million.Investors in the latest round included the venture capital firms General Catalyst, Andreessen Horowitz and Lightspeed Ventures, as well as Nvidia, Samsung, Salesforce, Cisco, IBM and BNP Paribas.Since OpenAI released ChatGPT in November 2022, investors have poured money into generative A.I. technology, which can answer questions in humanlike prose, create images and write software code. Two weeks ago, Elon Musk raised $6 billion for his start-up, xAI. OpenAI has raised roughly $13 billion from Microsoft, while another California start-up, Anthropic, has raised more than $7.3 billion.Mistral has positioned itself as a European alternative to the larger American tech giants and boasts that its products like the chatbot, Le Chat, are strong in a wider range of languages, including English. In contrast to firms like OpenAI and Anthropic, Mistral subscribes to the view that A.I. software should be open source, meaning that the programming codes should be available for anyone to download, copy, tweak and repurpose. Meta has also made its A.I. code open source.In a sign of A.I.’s growing geopolitical significance, President Emmanuel Macron of France and others in the French government have given the company their full-throated support. Mr. Macron has called Mistral a sign of “French genius” and invited the company’s chief executive, Arthur Mensch, to dinner at the presidential palace.On Tuesday, Mr. Mensch said in a statement that the latest investment would help keep the company independent and fuel its expansion. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Hey, Siri! Let’s Talk About How Apple Is Giving You an A.I. Makeover.

      by

      Apple, a latecomer to artificial intelligence, has struck a deal with OpenAI and developed tools to improve its Siri voice assistant, which it is set to showcase on Monday.Each June, Apple unveils its newest software features for the iPhone at its futuristic Silicon Valley campus. But at its annual developer conference on Monday, the company will shine a spotlight on a feature that isn’t new: Siri, its talking assistant, which has been around for more than a decade.What will be different this time is the technology powering Siri: generative artificial intelligence.In recent months, Adrian Perica, Apple’s vice president of corporate development, has helped spearhead an effort to bring generative A.I. to the masses, said two people with knowledge of the work, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the effort.Mr. Perica and his colleagues have talked with leading A.I. companies, including Google and OpenAI, seeking a partner to help Apple deliver generative A.I. across its business. Apple recently struck a deal with OpenAI, which makes the ChatGPT chatbot, to fold its technology into the iPhone, two people familiar with the agreement said. It was still in talks with Google as of last week, two people familiar with the conversations said.That has helped lead to a more conversational and versatile version of Siri, which will be shown on Monday, three people familiar with the company said. Siri will be powered by a generative A.I. system developed by Apple, which will allow the talking assistant to chat rather than just respond to one question at a time. Apple will market its new A.I. capabilities as Apple Intelligence, a person familiar with the marketing plan said.Apple, OpenAI and Google declined to comment. Apple’s agreement with OpenAI was previously reported by The Information and Bloomberg, which also reported the name for Apple’s A.I. system.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Samsung Workers Strike, the First in the Company’s History

      by

      The South Korean tech giant is at odds with some of its employees as it is trying to reassure investors that its memory chip business can meet demand.For the first time, workers at Samsung, the conglomerate that dominates the South Korean economy, went on strike on Friday.The action comes as Samsung Electronics fights to regain its edge in the business of making memory chips, a critical component in the advanced artificial intelligence systems that are reshaping longstanding rivalries among global technology companies.Workers in Samsung’s chip division were expected to make up the majority of those who will not report to work on Friday for a planned one-day strike. Union representatives said that multiple rounds of negotiations over wage increases and bonuses had broken down.“The company doesn’t value the union as a negotiating partner,” said Lee Hyun Kuk, the vice president of the Nationwide Samsung Electronics Union, the largest among five labor groups at the company. It says that it represents 28,000 members, about one-fifth of Samsung’s global work force, and that nearly 75 percent voted in favor of a strike in April.Lee Hyun Kuk, vice president of the union, said the workers aimed “to send a message to the management that we have reached a certain level of maturation.”Tina Hsu for The New York TimesMr. Lee said that union workers received no bonuses last year, while some had gotten bonuses of as much as 30 percent of their salaries in the past. “It feels like we’ve taken a 30 percent pay cut,” he said. The average union worker earned about 80 million won last year, or around $60,000, before incentives, he said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Can Artificial Intelligence Rethink Art? Should it?

      by

      There is an increasing overlap between art and artificial intelligence. Some celebrate it, while others worry.The skeleton seems to be at the epicenter of a mystifying ritual.In a new work by the French artist Pierre Huyghe, robots powered by artificial intelligence film the unburied remains of a man, and periodically position objects next to it in a ceremony that only they seem to understand. The scene takes place in the Atacama Desert in Chile, one of the planet’s oldest and driest deserts.“Camata” is on view at the Punta della Dogana – Pinault Collection exhibition space, in a show concurrent with the Venice Biennale (through Nov. 24). It’s a stirring example of the increasing overlap between art and artificial intelligence, or A.I.Those two vowels, placed side by side, seem to present a menace to many disciplines whose practitioners risk being replaced by smart and autonomous machines. Humanity itself could, at some future point, be replaced by superintelligent machines, according to some globally renowned thinkers and philosophers such as the Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari and Stephen Hawking.So why are artists dabbling with A.I.? And do they risk being extinguished by it?“There’s always been an attraction, on the part of artists, for chance: something which is beyond your own control, something that liberates you from the finite subject,” said Daniel Birnbaum, a curator who is the artistic director of the digital art production platform Acute Art and a panelist at the Art for Tomorrow conference here this week convened by the Democracy & Culture Foundation with panels moderated by New York Times journalists.Birnbaum said that Huyghe was among the artists who — rather than “overwhelming us with A.I.-generated nonsense from the internet” — are interested in exploring “places where nature and artificiality merge,” and where “biological systems and artificial systems somehow collaborate, creating visually strange things.”In the world at large, Birnbaum acknowledged, there were “frightening scenarios” whereby artificially intelligent systems could control decisions made by governments or the military, and pose grave threats to humanity.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More