The AI renaissance and why Open Source matters - An important point about open source being the lynchpin of democratic access to LLM/GPT technology. #
Sign our open letter on the future of AI | BCS - It’s not earth-shattering, but I’m happy to support my professional body on this. AI open letter to UK Government and Industry AI is not an existential threat to humanity; it will be a transformative force for good if we get critical decisions about its development and use right. The UK can help lead the way in setting professional and technical standards in AI roles, supported by a robust code of conduct, international collaboration and fully resourced regulation. #
We're doomed - or are we?
Yet another brief and partial attempt to make sense of the current AI debate #
- Finally got around to reading this useful lobbying paper covering some of the things we should be looking to our governments to do around AI. My summary is here. #
Applying ChatGPT-like tools across your own data
Summarising some key principles from Mick Vleeshouwer. #
A Rusty Advent
I’ve been using Advent of Code to start playing with the programming language Rust. This is what the journey looks like so far (early days). #
Only Humans
Harold Jarche has posted a brief review of “Only Humans Need Apply” by Thomas H Davenport . In his review Harold has added the main attributes that he sees as being needed to meet the book’s criteria for human adaptation to a world of automation: Step-up: directing the machine-augmented world (creativity) Step-in: using machines to augment work (deep thinking) Step-aside: doing human work that machines are not suited for (empathy) Step narrowly: specializing narrowly in a field too small for augmentation (passion) Step forward: developing new augmentation systems (curiosity) I challenge any UK-based educator or politician to identify where we are systematatically encouraging those attributes in our young people. #
The rise of the machines (continued)
Following on from The machines may eat your job, but that might not be a bad thing, I notice that Joanne Jacobs has written Who will work? Education, automation and jobs in which she references the (Obama) White House report “Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy” , which in turn was informed by the Frey and Osborne paper I referenced. Joanne goes on to highlight from that White House report that an increasing proportion of US high-school students are not “college-ready” at the end of high school. #
The machines may eat your job, but that might not be a bad thing – are any politicians acknowledging this?
Introduction There are a growing number of indicators that the nature of employment will change radically in our lifetimes, but politicians are all ignoring this. Background On BBC Breakfast this morning there was a piece about robots, themed on the forthcoming exhibiton at the Science Museum, In the piece they interviewed Michael A. Osborne , Associate Professor in Machine Learning, University of Oxford in which he repeated the research estimate that robots would replace 35% of UK employment by 2030, e. #