Comment wait'll RFK jr hears about THIS (Score 1) 196
Word up, freakin' Wolfman Jack and GOAT GLANDS! Public service, indeed.
Comment contrapoint: (Score 5, Funny) 144
The World Should Accept Some Bad Things Happening to Sam Altman to avoid the downsides of AI.
Eh, I'm sure it'll be fine. No need to be alarmist, like they were about Trump.
Comment Re:I quit stealing cars (Score 1) 88
So, steal parking. DUH!
Comment Kelvin timeline. (Score 4, Funny) 83
I hate this timeline.
Submission + - The University of Washington at Microsoft
theodp writes: GeekWire reports that the University of Washington has moved its Global Innovation Exchange {GIX) program to Microsoft’s campus in a rent-free deal (UW News release). GIX, an institute supporting tech leaders that offers an MS in Technology Innovation, is the first UW program to set up full-time operations at Microsoft, whose headquarters are just across Lake Washington from the university’s main campus. Microsoft provided a $42 million in-kind donation to establish the embedded facility; the UW is leasing the new 48,500-square-foot GIX space in Microsoft’s Building 92 rent-free. GIX debuted in 2015 as a partnership of the UW and China's Tsinghua University and received $70 million in Microsoft support at the now-abandoned GIX location in Bellevue (the Steve Ballmer Building), although indications are that a long-term arrangement did not come together as intended.
In a Thursday LinkedIn post, Microsoft President Brad Smith wrote: "Last night we opened a door unlike any other. At the heart of Microsoft’s campus, step into the new home of the UW's Global Innovation Exchange (GIX) and you cross from Microsoft into the University of Washington. No one has ever put a great research university and a leading technology company under the same roof quite like this. As far as I know, no one has even tried. The timing matters. Artificial intelligence is advancing fast. The question is whether the people building it understand the world it’s changing. This calls for a new style of education and leadership. We need leaders who understand the technology deeply and see things through other people’s eyes. Leaders who learn by collaborating on real projects with people from different countries and disciplines. That’s what GIX is built for. Students will learn from faculty across the UW, take classes taught by Microsoft employees, and be mentored by people from across our industry here in the Pacific Northwest."
Interestingly, Smith's contention that UW GIX students will benefit from a 'new style' of Microsoft and industry-influenced education sounds a lot like Smith's contention that K-12 school children are better off thanks to a new style of Microsoft and industry-influenced education. In an interview last month, Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools author Natasha Singer told NPR (podcast, transcript), "For my book, I spoke to Brad Smith, who's the president of Microsoft, and he has been one of the leaders in the tech industry pushing for [K-12] computer science [and now AI literacy] in schools. [...] And Brad Smith said, philanthropy in the private sector is doing this work because public schools have failed to do what they were supposed to do. And his view is that public schools should be teaching modern subjects like computer science, and they were not equipped to do it fast enough and the tech industry stepped in to help. And is it better than if schools were able to do this themselves? He said, no, but it's certainly better than nothing. And he said to me, you know, think about where we would be on computer science if the tech industry hadn't stepped up. [...] Well, I've been having this conversation with him for 10 years, and when we started having it 10 years ago, I said to him, I get that, but when big tech companies put their finger on the scale, it tips education in certain ways that not only favor the tech industry but can obscure equally or more important things."
So, is 'The University of Washington at Microsoft' a good or bad idea?
In a Thursday LinkedIn post, Microsoft President Brad Smith wrote: "Last night we opened a door unlike any other. At the heart of Microsoft’s campus, step into the new home of the UW's Global Innovation Exchange (GIX) and you cross from Microsoft into the University of Washington. No one has ever put a great research university and a leading technology company under the same roof quite like this. As far as I know, no one has even tried. The timing matters. Artificial intelligence is advancing fast. The question is whether the people building it understand the world it’s changing. This calls for a new style of education and leadership. We need leaders who understand the technology deeply and see things through other people’s eyes. Leaders who learn by collaborating on real projects with people from different countries and disciplines. That’s what GIX is built for. Students will learn from faculty across the UW, take classes taught by Microsoft employees, and be mentored by people from across our industry here in the Pacific Northwest."
Interestingly, Smith's contention that UW GIX students will benefit from a 'new style' of Microsoft and industry-influenced education sounds a lot like Smith's contention that K-12 school children are better off thanks to a new style of Microsoft and industry-influenced education. In an interview last month, Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools author Natasha Singer told NPR (podcast, transcript), "For my book, I spoke to Brad Smith, who's the president of Microsoft, and he has been one of the leaders in the tech industry pushing for [K-12] computer science [and now AI literacy] in schools. [...] And Brad Smith said, philanthropy in the private sector is doing this work because public schools have failed to do what they were supposed to do. And his view is that public schools should be teaching modern subjects like computer science, and they were not equipped to do it fast enough and the tech industry stepped in to help. And is it better than if schools were able to do this themselves? He said, no, but it's certainly better than nothing. And he said to me, you know, think about where we would be on computer science if the tech industry hadn't stepped up. [...] Well, I've been having this conversation with him for 10 years, and when we started having it 10 years ago, I said to him, I get that, but when big tech companies put their finger on the scale, it tips education in certain ways that not only favor the tech industry but can obscure equally or more important things."
So, is 'The University of Washington at Microsoft' a good or bad idea?
Comment Re:Try this simple query (Score 1) 115
"I only help with official U.S. government information and services.
If you have a question about a federal benefit, agency, or how-to (passports, taxes, Social Security, veteransâ(TM) services, and similar), ask that and I can look it up."
I guess it got removed.
Comment Re:People still use reddit? (Score 2) 103
Nah, we went to back to usenet, FidoNet, etc.
Submission + - Trump hosts AI CEOs about safety standards and renames AI "super-intelligence"
hcs_$reboot writes: Trump hosted the CEOs of OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, Google, Nvidia and other tech companies at the White House. They agreed to voluntary AI-safety standards, including independent audits and safeguards against AI systems accessing or hacking technical systems in unintended ways. Trump also strongly backed continued rapid expansion of AI data centers, despite concerns over their electricity use and impact on local communities. He said he may create a 10-member board to oversee AI safety and plans to appoint a new White House AI-policy official.
The meeting comes amid growing concerns about AI agents behaving unpredictably and public pressure for stronger safeguards. A Reuters/Ipsos poll cited by Reuters found 73% of Americans felt AI companies had not done enough to prevent serious harm.
During the meeting, Trump also said he prefers to call AI “super-intelligence” rather than artificial intelligence.
The meeting comes amid growing concerns about AI agents behaving unpredictably and public pressure for stronger safeguards. A Reuters/Ipsos poll cited by Reuters found 73% of Americans felt AI companies had not done enough to prevent serious harm.
During the meeting, Trump also said he prefers to call AI “super-intelligence” rather than artificial intelligence.
Comment Re:Underestimated The Cost of A Life (Score 1) 125
One time $10K is low. How about $10K per day? I will take that!
Submission + - Too Big to Fail? What Happens if the AI Bubble Bursts
theodp writes: Financial journalist Bethany McLean ponders What Happens if the A.I. Bubble Bursts (NYT, alt. source) in a NY Times op-ed. McLean, whose earlier reporting on Enron (YouTube) led to the downfall of the company and its auditor Arthur Andersen, begins:
It was about a year ago that Sarah Friar, the chief financial officer of OpenAI, said one way the company might sustain its current financial high-wire act was with a “backstop” or “guarantee” — as in, a government guarantee — “that allows the financing to happen.” Almost at the same time, Sam Altman, the company’s chief executive, said, “Given the magnitude of what I expect A.I.’s economic impact to look like,” the government should serve the role of “insurer of last resort.” They qualified those comments, but still, the gist seemed to be that the industry The Wall Street Journal calls “the biggest economic bet in U.S. history” is so important to the nation that if it needs more funding, taxpayers should be on the hook. Another way to put it is that the government should regard artificial intelligence the same way it regarded the banks in the 2008 financial crisis: too big to fail.
It’s hard to reconcile that suggestion with the other message blaring out of leading A.I. companies these days: that the technology “could kill us all by the end of the decade,” as the former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon recently warned, and must therefore be restrained. A.I. is so important that we can’t let it fail, but so risky that we shouldn’t let it go forward? Now add the conventional wisdom that the United States has to beat China at all costs (or as President Trump put it, “Whoever wins A.I. wins!”), and the arguments can start to reinforce one another. The more the race to dominate becomes existential, the more we have to spend on it; the more we spend on the industry, the more economically and geopolitically consequential it becomes; the more consequential it becomes, the greater the need to speed ahead, safety concerns be damned; the more we race ahead heedless, the more risk there is. All in all, it raises an even scarier possibility: What if rather than being too big to fail, A.I. is too big to stop?
She concludes:
This technology may be critical to the future of the United States, but preserving it doesn’t mean we have to bail out the private entities that are leading the field at this particular moment, nor does it mean we have to protect the fortunes of their investors and executives. The solution to the whole ever-expanding A.I. terror starts with remembering the lessons of the 2008 crisis: No company should be too big to fail.
It was about a year ago that Sarah Friar, the chief financial officer of OpenAI, said one way the company might sustain its current financial high-wire act was with a “backstop” or “guarantee” — as in, a government guarantee — “that allows the financing to happen.” Almost at the same time, Sam Altman, the company’s chief executive, said, “Given the magnitude of what I expect A.I.’s economic impact to look like,” the government should serve the role of “insurer of last resort.” They qualified those comments, but still, the gist seemed to be that the industry The Wall Street Journal calls “the biggest economic bet in U.S. history” is so important to the nation that if it needs more funding, taxpayers should be on the hook. Another way to put it is that the government should regard artificial intelligence the same way it regarded the banks in the 2008 financial crisis: too big to fail.
It’s hard to reconcile that suggestion with the other message blaring out of leading A.I. companies these days: that the technology “could kill us all by the end of the decade,” as the former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon recently warned, and must therefore be restrained. A.I. is so important that we can’t let it fail, but so risky that we shouldn’t let it go forward? Now add the conventional wisdom that the United States has to beat China at all costs (or as President Trump put it, “Whoever wins A.I. wins!”), and the arguments can start to reinforce one another. The more the race to dominate becomes existential, the more we have to spend on it; the more we spend on the industry, the more economically and geopolitically consequential it becomes; the more consequential it becomes, the greater the need to speed ahead, safety concerns be damned; the more we race ahead heedless, the more risk there is. All in all, it raises an even scarier possibility: What if rather than being too big to fail, A.I. is too big to stop?
She concludes:
This technology may be critical to the future of the United States, but preserving it doesn’t mean we have to bail out the private entities that are leading the field at this particular moment, nor does it mean we have to protect the fortunes of their investors and executives. The solution to the whole ever-expanding A.I. terror starts with remembering the lessons of the 2008 crisis: No company should be too big to fail.
Submission + - Put Multiple Values in One Cell with Lists and Arrays in Excel 1
theodp writes: Folks in Finance and other power Excel users were no doubt all atwitter over Microsoft's Thursday announcement of support for in-cell lists and arrays in Excel, including four new functions — FLATTEN, HAS, HASANY, HASALL — to manipulate them. From the home office in Redmond:
"Throughout Excel's 40-year history, you've only been able to put one value per cell. In this announcement, we're excited to share how that's changing with the release of lists, arrays in cells, and nested arrays, initially to Microsoft Excel for Windows and Mac Beta Channels. Many workbooks already try to pack multiple values into one cell. A project might list 'Carlos, Henrietta, Jacob' as three owners, or a Forms survey might return '2:00 PM; 2:30 PM; 3:00 PM' as one response. With lists, you can keep those values in one cell, while also keeping them separate for filtering, calculation and more."
If you haven't been keeping abreast of What's New in Excel, Microsoft has added a number of new features over the past years that enable Excel users to do things one might formerly have turned to programming languages and other computing environments to accomplish, including support for regular expressions, the LET and LAMDA functions, Python in Excel, and, of course, the obligatory AI support.
Which raises an interesting question: Is an Excel formula worth a thousand lines of AI-generated Python code? (especially if the latter is run in an overengineered infrastructure, such as an AI-generated complex CI/CD pipeline combined with cloud pipeline execution!)
"Throughout Excel's 40-year history, you've only been able to put one value per cell. In this announcement, we're excited to share how that's changing with the release of lists, arrays in cells, and nested arrays, initially to Microsoft Excel for Windows and Mac Beta Channels. Many workbooks already try to pack multiple values into one cell. A project might list 'Carlos, Henrietta, Jacob' as three owners, or a Forms survey might return '2:00 PM; 2:30 PM; 3:00 PM' as one response. With lists, you can keep those values in one cell, while also keeping them separate for filtering, calculation and more."
If you haven't been keeping abreast of What's New in Excel, Microsoft has added a number of new features over the past years that enable Excel users to do things one might formerly have turned to programming languages and other computing environments to accomplish, including support for regular expressions, the LET and LAMDA functions, Python in Excel, and, of course, the obligatory AI support.
Which raises an interesting question: Is an Excel formula worth a thousand lines of AI-generated Python code? (especially if the latter is run in an overengineered infrastructure, such as an AI-generated complex CI/CD pipeline combined with cloud pipeline execution!)
Comment Re:Thanks for reminding me... (Score 1) 75
Ooh yeah. That's a good one. Remember THEM!?
Comment Re:Thanks for reminding me... (Score 1) 75
I am an ant, not a human.
Comment Re:Thanks for reminding me... (Score 1) 75
Ditto. "Wipe them. All of them."
Comment Pinocchio Pleasure Island Business Model? (Score 4, Insightful) 119
Pinocchio (Pleasure Island): A mysterious Coachman hires Honest John to find disobedient and naughty boys for him to take to Pleasure Island, a notorious and infamous place. Honest John, despite the legal risks and the Coachman's implication of what happens to the boys, accepts the job out of fear, and finds Pinocchio, persuading him to take a vacation on Pleasure Island. On the way to the island, Pinocchio befriends Lampwick, a delinquent boy. At Pleasure Island, without rules or authority to enforce their activity, Pinocchio, Lampwick, and many other boys soon engage in vices such as vandalism, fighting, smoking and drinking. Jiminy eventually finds Pinocchio in a bar smoking and playing pool with Lampwick, and the two have a falling out after Pinocchio defends Lampwick for his actions. As Jiminy tries leaving Pleasure Island, he discovers that the island hides a horrible curse that transforms the boys into donkeys after making "jackasses" of themselves, and they are sold by the Coachman into slave labor.
