An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: A significant proportion of people paid to train AI models may be themselves outsourcing that work to AI, a new study has found. It takes an incredible amount of data to train AI systems to perform specific tasks accurately and reliably. Many companies pay gig workers on platforms like Mechanical Turk to complete tasks that are typically hard to automate, such as solving CAPTCHAs, labeling data and annotating text. This data is then fed into AI models to train them. The workers are poorly paid and are often expected to complete lots of tasks very quickly. No wonder some of them may be turning to tools like ChatGPT to maximize their earning potential. But how many? To find out, a team of researchers from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL) hired 44 people on the gig work platform Amazon Mechanical Turk to summarize 16 extracts from medical research papers. Then they analyzed their responses using an AI model they'd trained themselves that looks for telltale signals of ChatGPT output, such as lack of variety in choice of words. They also extracted the workers' keystrokes in a bid to work out whether they'd copied and pasted their answers, an indicator that they'd generated their responses elsewhere. They estimated that somewhere between 33% and 46% of the workers had used AI models like OpenAI's ChatGPT. It's a percentage that's likely to grow even higher as ChatGPT and other AI systems become more powerful and easily accessible, according to the authors of the study, which has been shared on arXiv (PDF) and is yet to be peer-reviewed. Using AI-generated data to train AI could introduce further errors into already error-prone models. Large language models regularly present false information as fact. If they generate incorrect output that is itself used to train other AI models, the errors can be absorbed by those models and amplified over time, making it more and more difficult to work out their origins, says Ilia Shumailov, a junior research fellow in computer science at Oxford University, who was not involved in the project. Even worse, there's no simple fix. "The problem is, when you're using artificial data, you acquire the errors from the misunderstandings of the models and statistical errors," he says. "You need to make sure that your errors are not biasing the output of other models, and there's no simple way to do that."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Generative AI-related job postings in the United States jumped about 20% last month as companies look to harness a technology that has been widely touted as the next big growth driver, according to data from job portal Indeed. From a report: The May figure, at 204 per million job postings, was also more than double the 2021 level and underscored the buzz around AI, sparked by the runaway success of OpenAI's ChatGPT. Data scientist roles made up 5% of the AI job postings on Indeed's U.S. platform, while roles such as software engineer, machine learning engineer and data engineer were also in demand. "There has been a notable increase in job seeker interest in AI-related jobs, especially since the introduction of ChatGPT," said Nick Bunker, director of economic research at Indeed. The jump comes at a time when the broader tech job market is under pressure from mass layoffs at companies such as Meta Platforms and Amazon.com, which are tightening their belts to cope with an uncertain economy. Overall, tech jobs are down 43.6% in the United States from June last year, Indeed said, adding the number of available AI jobs was not keeping up with the interest from job seekers.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Dropbox is introducing two new AI-powered services into its platform. One is a tool for summarizing and querying documents, while the other is a universal search engine that can access your files in Dropbox but also across the entire web. "It's called Dash and comes from Dropbox's 2021 acquisition of a company called Command E," reports The Verge. From the report: The idea behind Dash, Dropbox CEO Drew Houston tells me, is that your stuff isn't all files and folders anymore, and so Dropbox can't be, either. "What used to be 100 files or icons on your desktop," he says, "is now 100 tabs in your browser, with your Google Docs and your Airtables and Figmas and everything else." All the tools are better, but they resist useful organization. "So you're just like, okay, I think someone sent that to me. Was it in an email? Was it Slack? Was it a text? Maybe it was pasted in the Zoom chat during the meeting." Dash aims to be the "Google for your personal stuff" app that so many others have tried and failed to pull off. The Dash app comes in two parts. There's a desktop app, which you can invoke from anywhere with the CMD-E keyboard shortcut, that acts as a universal search for everything on your device and in all your connected apps. (If you've ever used an app like Raycast or Alfred as a launcher, Dash will look very familiar.) There's also a browser extension, which offers the same search but also turns your new tab page into a curated list of your stuff. One section of the Dash start page might include the docs Dropbox thinks you'll need for the meeting starting in five minutes; another might pull together a bunch of similar documents you've been working on recently into what Dropbox calls a "Stack." You can also create your own stacks, and as you create files and even browse the internet, Dash will suggest files and links you might add. [...] As of today, Dropbox AI available to all Pro customers and a few teams, and there's a waitlist to get into the Dash beta as well. The next phase for Dropbox, Houston says, is to learn what people want and how they use the products. He says he's happy to be somewhat conservative at first in the name of not making huge mistakes -- you really can't have an AI hallucinating information out of your most sensitive work docs -- but he sees this stuff getting better fast.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader shares a report: The world of Secret Invasion is decidedly sketchy. With thousands of shapeshifting Skrulls on Earth, you can't trust what you think you're seeing. One second, you're looking at Nick Fury or an esteemed world leader; the next, you see their face morph into something (or someone) else entirely. This is a description of the plot of the new Marvel Cinematic Universe show on Disney Plus (as well as its comic book counterpart), which follows Nick Fury as he uncovers -- what else? -- a secret invasion by the Skrull population on Earth. But the concept of shape-shifting is also seen in the series' very different approach to its opening credits, which look like a sort of watercolor rendering of the key players and themes of Secret Invasion. As we see a sort of jittery and ominous sequence of the Skrull green taking over more and more of the world, it looks a lot like if an AI was prompted with the concept of "Skrull cubism" -- which, actually, isn't that far off of what it is. As director and executive producer Ali Selim tells Polygon, the intro sequence was designed by Method Studios using artificial intelligence, something he thinks plays with the very themes of the show. "When we reached out to the AI vendors, that was part of it -- it just came right out of the shape-shifting, Skrull world identity, you know? Who did this? Who is this?" Selim says. Like many people, Selim says he doesn't "really understand" how the artificial intelligence works, but was fascinated with the ways in which the AI could translate the sense of foreboding he wanted for the series. "We would talk to them about ideas and themes and words, and then the computer would go off and do something. And then we could change it a little bit by using words, and it would change."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Jack Ma-backed Ant Group is developing large-language model technology that will power ChatGPT-style services, joining a list of Chinese companies seeking to win an edge in next-generation artificial intelligence. From a report: The project known as "Zhen Yi" is being created by a dedicated unit and will deploy in-house research. An Ant spokesperson confirmed the news which was first reported by Chinastarmarket.cn Ant is racing against companies including its affiliate Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., Baidu and SenseTime. Their efforts mirror developments in US where Alphabet's Google and Microsoft are exploring generative AI, which can create original content from poetry to art just with simple user prompts.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Mustafa Suleyman, co-founder of DeepMind, suggests chatbots like ChatGPT and Google Bard should be put through a "modern Turing test" where their ability to turn $100,000 into $1 million is evaluated to measure human-like intelligence. He discusses the idea in his new book called "The Coming Wave: Technology, Power, and the Twenty-first Century's Greatest Dilemma." Insider reports: In the book, Suleyman dismissed the traditional Turing test because it's "unclear whether this is a meaningful milestone or not," Bloomberg reported Tuesday. "It doesn't tell us anything about what the system can do or understand, anything about whether it has established complex inner monologues or can engage in planning over abstract time horizons, which is key to human intelligence," he added. The Turing test was introduced by Alan Turing in the 1950s to examine whether a machine has human-level intelligence. During the test, human evaluators determine whether they're speaking to a human or a machine. If the machine can pass for a human, then it passes the test. Instead of comparing AI's intelligence to humans, Suleyman proposes tasking a bot with short-term goals and tasks that it can complete with little human input in a process known as "artificial capable intelligence," or ACI. To achieve ACI, Suleyman says AI bots should pass a new Turing test in which it receives a $100,000 seed investment and has to turn it into $1 million. As part of the test, the bot must research an e-commerce business idea, develop a plan for the product, find a manufacturer, and then sell the item. He expects AI to achieve this milestone in the next two years. "We don't just care about what a machine can say; we also care about what it can do," he wrote, per Bloomberg.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: European regulators are at a crossroads over how AI will be regulated -- and ultimately used commercially and non-commercially -- in the region, and today the EU's largest consumer group, the BEUC, weighed in with its own position: stop dragging your feet, and "launch urgent investigations into the risks of generative AI" now, it said. "Generative AI such as ChatGPT has opened up all kinds of possibilities for consumers, but there are serious concerns about how these systems might deceive, manipulate and harm people. They can also be used to spread disinformation, perpetuate existing biases which amplify discrimination, or be used for fraud," said Ursula Pachl, Deputy Director General of BEUC, in a statement. "We call on safety, data and consumer protection authorities to start investigations now and not wait idly for all kinds of consumer harm to have happened before they take action. These laws apply to all products and services, be they AI-powered or not and authorities must enforce them." The BEUC, which represents consumer organizations in 13 countries in the EU, issued the call to coincide with a report out today (PDF) from one of its members, Forbrukerradet in Norway. That Norwegian report is unequivocal in its position: AI poses consumer harms (the title of the report says it all: "Ghost in the Machine: addressing the consumer harms of generative AI") and poses numerous problematic issues. It highlights, for example, how "certain AI developers including Big Tech companies" have closed off systems from external scrutiny making it difficult to see how data is collected or algorithms work; the fact that some systems produce incorrect information as blithely as they do correct results, with users often none the wiser about which it might be; AI that's built to mislead or manipulate users; the bias issue based on the information that is fed into a particular AI model; and security, specifically how AI could be weaponized to scam people or breach systems. [...] The AI Law, when implemented, will be the world's first attempt to try to codify some kind of understanding and legal enforcement around how AI is used commercially and non-commercially. The next step in the process is for the EU to engage with individual countries in the EU to hammer out what final form the law will take -- specifically to identify what (and who) would fit into its categories, and what will not. The question will be in how readily different countries agree together. The EU wants to finalize this process by the end of this year, it said. "It is crucial that the EU makes this law as watertight as possible to protect consumers," said Pachl in her statement. "All AI systems, including generative AI, need public scrutiny, and public authorities must reassert control over them. Lawmakers must require that the output from any generative AI system is safe, fair and transparent for consumers."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Variety: Christopher Nolan got honest about artificial intelligence in a new interview with Wired magazine. The Oscar-nominated filmmaker says the writing has been on the wall about AI dangers for quite some time, but now the media is more focused on the technology because it poses a threat to their jobs. "The growth of AI in terms of weapons systems and the problems that it is going to create have been very apparent for a lot of years," Nolan said. "Few journalists bothered to write about it. Now that there's a chatbot that can write an article for a local newspaper, suddenly it's a crisis." Nolan said the main issue with AI is "a very simple one" and relates to the technology being used by companies to "evade responsibility for their actions." "If we endorse the view that AI is all-powerful, we are endorsing the view that it can alleviate people of responsibility for their actions -- militarily, socioeconomically, whatever," Nolan continued. "The biggest danger of AI is that we attribute these godlike characteristics to it and therefore let ourselves off the hook. I don't know what the mythological underpinnings of this are, but throughout history there's this tendency of human beings to create false idols, to mold something in our own image and then say we've got godlike powers because we did that." Nolan added that he feels there is "a real danger" with AI, saying, "I identify the danger as the abdication of responsibility." "I feel that AI can still be a very powerful tool for us. I'm optimistic about that. I really am," he said. "But we have to view it as a tool. The person who wields it still has to maintain responsibility for wielding that tool. If we accord AI the status of a human being, the way at some point legally we did with corporations, then yes, we're going to have huge problems." "The whole machine learning as applied to deepfake technology, that's an extraordinary step forward in visual effects and in what you could do with audio," Nolan told Wired. "There will be wonderful things that will come out, longer term, in terms of environments, in terms of building a doorway or a window, in terms of pooling the massive data of what things look like, and how light reacts to materials. Those things are going to be enormously powerful tools." Will Nolan be using AI technology on his films? "I'm, you know, very much the old analog fusty filmmaker," he said. "I shoot on film. And I try to give the actors a complete reality around it. My position on technology as far as it relates to my work is that I want to use technology for what it's best for. Like if we do a stunt, a hazardous stunt. You could do it with much more visible wires, and then you just paint out the wires. Things like that."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

OpenAI -- an early mover in releasing chatbots powered by large-language models -- is contemplating another initiative to extend its influence in the world of artificial intelligence. From a report: The company is considering launching a marketplace in which customers could sell AI models they customize for their own needs to other businesses, according to two people with knowledge of discussions at the company. The marketplace could be OpenAI's version of an app store, offering businesses a way to access bleeding-edge large-language models that can, for instance, sniff out financial fraud in online retail transactions or answer questions about specific markets with up-to-date information, these people said. Creating such an app store also could be a hedge against a future where no AI model dominates. It's not clear whether OpenAI would charge commissions on those sales or otherwise look to generate revenue from the marketplace.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Billy Perrigo, reporting for Time: The CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman, has spent the last month touring world capitals where, at talks to sold-out crowds and in meetings with heads of governments, he has repeatedly spoken of the need for global AI regulation. But behind the scenes, OpenAI has lobbied for significant elements of the most comprehensive AI legislation in the world -- the E.U.'s AI Act -- to be watered down in ways that would reduce the regulatory burden on the company, according to documents about OpenAI's engagement with E.U. officials obtained by TIME from the European Commission via freedom of information requests. In several cases, OpenAI proposed amendments that were later made to the final text of the E.U. law -- which was approved by the European Parliament on June 14, and will now proceed to a final round of negotiations before being finalized as soon as January. In 2022, OpenAI repeatedly argued to European officials that the forthcoming AI Act should not consider its general purpose AI systems -- including GPT-3, the precursor to ChatGPT, and the image generator Dall-E 2 -- to be "high risk," a designation that would subject them to stringent legal requirements including transparency, traceability, and human oversight.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Meta says its new speech-generating AI model is too dangerous for public release. Meta announced a new AI model called Voicebox yesterday, one it says is the most versatile yet for speech generation, but it's not releasing it yet: "There are many exciting use cases for generative speech models, but because of the potential risks of misuse, we are not making the Voicebox model or code publicly available at this time." The model is still only a research project, but Meta says can generate speech in six languages from samples as short as two seconds and could be used for "natural, authentic" translation in the future, among other things.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: While schools debate what to teach students about powerful new A.I. tools, tech giants, universities and nonprofits are intervening with free lessons," writes the NY Times reports in Hey, Alexa, What Should Students Learn About AI? Senior Amazon executive Rohit Prasad visited a school in Boston called STEM Academy to observe an Amazon-sponsored AI lesson using Alexa, according to the article, "And he assured the Dearborn students there would soon be millions of new jobs in A.I." "We need to create the talent for the next generation," Mr. Prasad, the head scientist for Alexa, told the class. "So we are educating about A.I. at the earliest, grass-roots level." A few miles away, Sally Kornbluth, the president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was delivering a more sobering message about A.I. to students from local schools who had gathered at Boston's Kennedy Library complex for a workshop on A.I. risks and regulation. "Because A.I. is such a powerful new technology, in order for it to work well in society, it really needs some rules," Dr. Kornbluth said. "We have to make sure that what it doesn't do is cause harm." The same-day events — one encouraging work in artificial intelligence and the other cautioning against deploying the technology too hastily — mirrored the larger debate currently raging in the United States over the promise and potential peril of A.I. Both student workshops were organized by an M.I.T. initiative on "responsible A.I." whose donors include Amazon, Google and Microsoft. The article emphasizes that schools face a big question: Should they teach AI programming and other AI-related skills employers will seek? "Or should students learn to anticipate and mitigate A.I. harms?" Last week, Amazon agreed to pay $25 million to settle federal charges that it had indefinitely kept children's voice recordings, violating the federal online children's privacy law. The company said it disputed the charges and denied that it had violated the law. The company noted that customers could review and delete their Alexa voice recordings. But the one-hour Amazon-led workshop did not touch on the company's data practices.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The Associated Press reports: A project using artificial intelligence to track social media abuse aimed at players at the 2022 World Cup identified more than 300 people whose details are being given to law enforcement, FIFA said Sunday. The people made "abusive, discriminatory, or threatening posts [or] comments" on platforms like Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and YouTube, soccer's governing body said in a report detailing efforts to protect players and officials during the tournament played in Qatar. The biggest spike in abuse was during the France-England quarterfinals game, said the report from a project created jointly by FIFA and the players' global union FIFPRO. It used AI to help identify and hide offensive social media posts... About 20 million posts and comments were scanned and more than 19,000 were flagged as abusive... The identities of the more than 300 people identified for posting abuse "will be shared with the relevant member associations and jurisdictional law authorities to facilitate real-world action being taken against offenders," FIFA said. "Discrimination is a criminal act. With the help of this tool, we are identifying the perpetrators and we are reporting them to the authorities so that they are punished for their actions," FIFA President Gianni Infantino said in a statement. "We also expect the social media platforms to accept their responsibilities and to support us in the fight against all forms of discrimination." FIFA and FIFPRO have extended the system for use at the Women's World Cup that starts next month in Australia and New Zealand.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Slashdot reader rtfa0987 spotted this on the front page of the San Jose Mercury News. "Silicon Valley is poised once again to cash in on other people's products, making a data grab of unprecedented scale that has already spawned lawsuits and congressional hearings. Chatbots and other forms of generative artificial intelligence that burst onto the technology scene in recent months are fed vast amounts of material scraped from the internet — books, screenplays, research papers, news stories, photos, art, music, code and more — to produce answers, imagery or sound in response to user prompts... But a thorny, contentious and highly consequential issue has arisen: A great deal of the bots' fodder is copyrighted property... The new AI's intellectual-property problem goes beyond art into movies and television, photography, music, news media and computer coding. Critics worry that major players in tech, by inserting themselves between producers and consumers in commercial marketplaces, will suck out the money and remove financial incentives for producing TV scripts, artworks, books, movies, music, photography, news coverage and innovative software. "It could be catastrophic," said Danielle Coffey, CEO of the News/Media Alliance, which represents nearly 2,000 U.S. news publishers, including this news organization. "It could decimate our industry." The new technology, as happened with other Silicon Valley innovations, including internet-search, social media and food delivery, is catching on among consumers and businesses so quickly that it may become entrenched — and beloved by users — long before regulators and lawmakers gather the knowledge and political will to impose restraints and mitigate harms. "We may need legislation," said Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, who as a member of the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony on copyright and generative AI last month. "Content creators have rights and we need to figure out a way how those rights will be respected...." Furor over the content grabbing is surging. Photo-sales giant Getty is also suing Stability AI. Striking Hollywood screenwriters last month raised concerns that movie studios will start using chatbot-written scripts fed on writers' earlier work. The record industry has lodged a complaint with federal authorities over copyrighted music being used to train AI. The article includes some unique perspectives: There's a technical solution being proposed by the software engineer-CEO of Dazzle Labs, a startup building a platform for controlling personal data. The Mercury News summarizes it as "content producers could annotate their work with conditions for use that would have to be followed by companies crawling the web for AI fodder." Santa Clara University law school professor Eric Goldman "believes the law favors use of copyrighted material for training generative AI. 'All works build upon precedent works. We are all free to take pieces of precedent works. What generative AI does is accelerate that process, but it's the same process. It's all part of an evolution of our society's storehouse of knowledge...."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Quanta magazine thinks there's a better alternative to the artificial neural networks (or ANNs) powering AI systems. (Alternate URL) For one, ANNs are "super power-hungry," said Cornelia Fermüller, a computer scientist at the University of Maryland. "And the other issue is [their] lack of transparency." Such systems are so complicated that no one truly understands what they're doing, or why they work so well. This, in turn, makes it almost impossible to get them to reason by analogy, which is what humans do — using symbols for objects, ideas and the relationships between them.... Bruno Olshausen, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Berkeley, and others argue that information in the brain is represented by the activity of numerous neurons... This is the starting point for a radically different approach to computation known as hyperdimensional computing. The key is that each piece of information, such as the notion of a car, or its make, model or color, or all of it together, is represented as a single entity: a hyperdimensional vector. A vector is simply an ordered array of numbers. A 3D vector, for example, comprises three numbers: the x, y and z coordinates of a point in 3D space. A hyperdimensional vector, or hypervector, could be an array of 10,000 numbers, say, representing a point in 10,000-dimensional space. These mathematical objects and the algebra to manipulate them are flexible and powerful enough to take modern computing beyond some of its current limitations and foster a new approach to artificial intelligence... Hyperdimensional computing tolerates errors better, because even if a hypervector suffers significant numbers of random bit flips, it is still close to the original vector. This implies that any reasoning using these vectors is not meaningfully impacted in the face of errors. The team of Xun Jiao, a computer scientist at Villanova University, has shown that these systems are at least 10 times more tolerant of hardware faults than traditional ANNs, which themselves are orders of magnitude more resilient than traditional computing architectures... All of these benefits over traditional computing suggest that hyperdimensional computing is well suited for a new generation of extremely sturdy, low-power hardware. It's also compatible with "in-memory computing systems," which perform the computing on the same hardware that stores data (unlike existing von Neumann computers that inefficiently shuttle data between memory and the central processing unit). Some of these new devices can be analog, operating at very low voltages, making them energy-efficient but also prone to random noise. Thanks to Slashdot reader ZipNada for sharing the article.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from ZDNet: Clarify Capital, a small business lender, asked 250 investors and 250 business owners to rate a set of human-created and GPT-4-generated pitch decks without letting the participants know that AI was involved. To make matters more interesting, the human-generated pitches were successful ones that had secured funding in the past. The results showed that GPT-4 pitches were overall more effective than those made by humans. The AI-generated pitches beat out human ones in quality, key element description, and problem description. According to the survey, the investors and business owners were three times more likely to invest after reading the GPT-4 deck than the human one, and they found the AI-generated decks twice as convincing. Furthermore, one in five of those professionals said that they would invest $10,000 more in the AI-generated pitches. The survey also tested the effectiveness of the decks across different industries, including finance, marketing, and investment. Unsurprisingly, across all of these industries, the GPT-4 decks were more successful in securing investments. The survey doesn't disclose which GPT-4-based AI chatbot the survey is using.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his deputies want other companies to freely use and profit from new artificial intelligence software Meta is developing, a decision that could have big implications for other AI developers and businesses that are increasingly adopting it. The Information: Meta is working on ways to make the next version of its open-source large-language model -- technology that can power chatbots like ChatGPT -- available for commercial use, said a person with direct knowledge of the situation and a person who was briefed about it. The move could prompt a feeding frenzy among AI developers eager for alternatives to proprietary software sold by rivals Google and OpenAI. It would also indirectly benefit Meta's own AI development. [...] Meta stands to gain from releasing open-source AI models. As developers adopt and improve those models or patch their security holes, Meta will be able to incorporate those improvements in AI models for its own consumer and advertising products, Zuckerberg said in an April call with stock analysts. For instance, Zuckerberg has said he wants small businesses and content creators that use Facebook's apps to have access to "AI agents" who can act on their behalf by automatically communicating with fans or customers. "LLaMA or the language model underlying this is basically going to be the engine that powers that," he said in an interview last week with podcaster Lex Fridman.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

European Union officials have voted in favor of stricter regulations on artificial intelligence, including a ban on AI use in biometric surveillance and a requirement for AI systems like OpenAI's ChatGPT to disclose when content is generated by AI. Ars Technica reports: On Wednesday, European Union officials voted to implement stricter proposed regulations concerning AI, according to Reuters. The updated draft of the "AI Act" law includes a ban on the use of AI in biometric surveillance and requires systems like OpenAI's ChatGPT to reveal when content has been generated by AI. While the draft is still non-binding, it gives a strong indication of how EU regulators are thinking about AI. The new changes to the European Commission's proposed law -- which have not yet been finalized -- intend to shield EU citizens from potential threats linked to machine learning technology. The new draft of the AI Act includes a provision that would ban companies from scraping biometric data (such as user photos) from social media for facial recognition training purposes. News of firms like Clearview AI using this practice to create facial recognition systems drew severe criticism from privacy advocates in 2020. However, Reuters reports that this rule might be a source of contention with some EU countries who oppose a blanket ban on AI in biometric surveillance. The new EU draft also imposes disclosure and transparency measures on generative AI. Image synthesis services like Midjourney would be required to disclose AI-generated content to help people identify synthesized images. The bill would also require that generative AI companies provide summaries of copyrighted material scraped and utilized in the training of each system. While the publishing industry backs this proposal, according to The New York Times, tech developers argue against its technical feasibility. Additionally, creators of generative AI systems would be required to implement safeguards to prevent the generation of illegal content, and companies working on "high-risk applications" must assess their potential impact on fundamental rights and the environment. The current draft of the EU law designates AI systems that could influence voters and elections as "high-risk." It also classifies systems used by social media platforms with over 45 million users under the same category, thus encompassing platforms like Meta and Twitter. [...] Experts say that after considerable debate over the new rules among EU member nations, a final version of the AI Act isn't expected until later this year.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

According to global consulting leader McKinsey and Company, Generative AI could add "2.6 trillion to $4.4 trillion annually" to the global economy. That's almost the "economic equivalent of adding an entire new country the size and productivity of the United Kingdom to the Earth ($3.1 trillion GDP in 2021)," notes VentureBeat. From the report: The $2.6 trillion to $4.4 trillion economic impact figure marks a huge increase over McKinsey's previous estimates of the AI field's impact on the economy from 2017, up 15 to 40% from before. This upward revision is due to the incredibly fast embrace and potential use cases of GenAI tools by large and small enterprises. Furthermore, McKinsey finds "current generative AI and other technologies have the potential to automate work activities that absorb 60 to 70% of employees' time today." Does this mean massive job loss is inevitable? No, according to Alex Sukharevsky, senior partner and global leader of QuantumBlack, McKinsey's in-house AI division and report co-author. "You basically could make it significantly faster to perform these jobs and do so much more precisely than they are performed today," Sukharevsky told VentureBeat. What that translates to is an addition of "0.2 to 3.3 percentage points annually to productivity growth" to the entire global economy, he said. However, as the report notes, "workers will need support in learning new skills, and some will change occupations. If worker transitions and other risks can be managed, generative AI could contribute substantively to economic growth and support a more sustainable, inclusive world." Also, the advent of accessible GenAI has pushed up McKinsey's previous estimates for workplace automation: "Half of today's work activities could be automated between 2030 and 2060, with a midpoint in 2045, or roughly a decade earlier than in our previous estimates." Specifically, McKinsey's report found that four types of tasks -- customer operations, marketing and sales, software engineering and R&D -- were likely to account for 75% of the value add of GenAI in particular. "Examples include generative AI's ability to support interactions with customers, generate creative content for marketing and sales and draft computer code based on natural-language prompts, among many other tasks." [...] Overall, McKinsey views GenAI as a "technology catalyst," pushing industries further along toward automation journeys, but also freeing up the creative potential of employees. "I do believe that if anything, we are getting into the age of creativity and the age of creator," Sukharevsky said.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Sens. Josh Hawley and Richard Blumenthal want to clarify that the internet's bedrock liability law does not apply to generative AI, per a new bill introduced Wednesday. From a report: Legal experts and lawmakers have questioned whether AI-created works would qualify for legal immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the law that largely shields platforms from lawsuits over third-party content. It's a newly urgent issue thanks to the explosive of generative AI. The new bipartisan bill bolsters the argument that Section 230 doesn't cover AI-generated work. It also gives lawmakers an opening to go after Section 230 after vowing to amend it, without much success, for years. Section 230 is often credited as the law that allowed the internet to flourish and for social media to take off, as well as websites hosting travel listings and restaurant reviews. To its detractors, it goes too far and is not fit for today's web, allowing social media companies to leave too much harmful content up online. Hawley and Blumenthal's "No Section 230 Immunity for AI Act" would amend Section 230 "by adding a clause that strips immunity from AI companies in civil claims or criminal prosecutions involving the use or provision of generative AI," per a description of the bill from Hawley's office.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.