BELLEVUE, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep 12, 2023--

Zambia says it plans to regulate the sale of carbon credits and take a share of the proceeds

Microsoft Corp. and Activision Blizzard Inc. — the video-game empire it’s seeking to take over in a $69

Nintendo confirmed an upcoming Animal Crossing LEGO set. Here's everything we know so far.

They are 22 words that could terrify those who read them, as brutal in their simplicity as they are general in their meaning: “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.” That is the statement from San Francisco-based non-profit the Center for AI Safety, and signed by chief executives from Google Deepmind and ChatGPT creators OpenAI, along with other major figures in artificial intelligence research. The fact that the statement has been signed by so many leading AI researchers and companies means that it should be heeded. But it also means that it should be robustly examined: why are they saying this, and why now? The answer might take some of the terror away (though not all of it). Writing a statement like this functions as something like a reverse marketing campaign: our products are so powerful and so new, it says, that they could wipe out the world. Most tech products just promise to change our lives; these ones could end it. And so what looks like a statement about danger is also one that highlights just how much Google, OpenAI and more think they have to offer. Warning that AI could be as terrible as pandemics also has the peculiar effect of making artificial intelligence's dangers seem as if they just arise naturally in the world, like the mutation of a virus. But every dangerous AI is the product of intentional choices by its developers – and in most cases, from the companies that have signed the new statement. Who is the statement for? Who are these companies talking to? After all, they are the ones who are creating the products that might extinguish life on Earth. It reads a little like being hectored by a burglar about your house’s locks not being good enough. None of this is to say that the warning is untrue, or shouldn't be heeded; the danger is very real indeed. But it does mean that we should ask a few more questions of those warning us about it, especially when they are conveniently the companies that created this ostensibly apocalyptic tech in the first place. AI doesn't feel so world-destroying yet. The statement's doomy words might come as some surprise to those who have used the more accessible AI systems, such as ChatGPT. Conversations with that chatbot and others can be funny, surprising, delightful and sometimes scary – but it's hard to see how what is mostly prattle and babble from a smart but stupid chatbot could destroy the world. They also might come as a surprise to those who have read about the many, very important ways that AI is already being used to help save us, not kill us. Only last week, scientists announced that they had used artificial intelligence to find new antibiotics that could kill off superbugs, and that is just the beginning. By focusing on the "risk of extinction" and the "societal-scale risk" posed by AI, however, its proponents are able to shift the focus away from both the weaknesses of actually existing AI and the ethical questions that surround it. The intensity of the statement, the reference to nuclear war and pandemics, make it feel like we are at a point equivalent with cowering in our bomb shelters or in lockdown. They say there are no atheists in foxholes; we might also say there are no ethicists in fallout shelters. If AI is akin to nuclear war, though, we are closer to the formation of the Manhattan Project than we are to the Cold War. We don’t need to be hunkering down as if the danger is here and there is nothing we can do about it but “mitigate it”. There's still time to decide what this technology looks like, how powerful it is and who will be at the sharp end of that power. Statements like this are a reflection of the fact that the systems we have today are a long way from those that we might have tomorrow: the work going on at the companies who warned us about these issues is vast, and could be much more transformative than chatting with a robot. It is all happening in secret, and shrouded in both mystery and marketing buzz, but what we can discern is that we might only be a few years away from systems that are both more powerful and more sinister. Already, the world is struggling to differentiate between fake images and real ones; soon, developments in AI could make it very difficult to find the difference between fake people and real ones. At least according to some in the industry, AI is set to develop at such a pace that it might only be a few years before those warnings are less abstractly worrying and more concretely terrifying. The statement is correct in identifying those risks, and urging work to avoid them. But it is more than a little helpful to the companies that signed it in making those risks seem inevitable and naturally occurring, as if they are not choosing to build and profit from the technology they are so worried about. It is those companies, not artificial intelligence, that have the power to decide what that future looks like – and whether it will include our "extinction". Read More Opinion: Age gap relationships might seem wrong, but they work. Trust me Hands up if you trust Boris Johnson | Tom Peck Boris’s ‘ratty rat’ rage against Sunak could bring the Tories down | John Rentoul Opinion: Age gap relationships might seem wrong, but they work. Trust me Hands up if you trust Boris Johnson | Tom Peck Boris’s ‘ratty rat’ rage against Sunak could bring the Tories down | John Rentoul

The UK’s advertising regulator banned an advert by Anglian Water Group Ltd. because it didn’t reflect an environmental

You may have been hearing a lot about UFOs lately, and that’s largely thanks to Ufologist Dr. Steven Greer who has been hosting a conference on the subject. A range of people were invited to share their insights as part of an event streamed online and it saw Eric Hecker describe the south pole as an “air traffic control” hub for aliens. The conspiracy theorist made some pretty out-there claims at the conference, but it’s the discussion about the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station that was most significant. Hecker claimed that in 2010 Raytheon, the US aerospace and defence conglomerate chose him to be a contractor on the research centre operated by the United States National Science Foundation. Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter There was “much more” to the station that first met the eye, according to Hecker. Monday, June 12, 2023! Dr. Greer's Groundbreaking National Press Club Event! FREE to Watch! www.youtube.com He claimed the station actually operated as an “air traffic control” centre for UFOs and communicated with “exotic” crafts by sending neutrino rays up into space. Hecker went further by talking about “digital optical modules” buried a mile beneath the surface under the ice. He claims they were buried in order to detect neutrino interactions while being deep enough not to interfere with radiation readings. He also said he personally saw a “powerful green laser” pointing “at the cosmos.” It comes after a whistleblower who claims that the US government has been operating UFO retrieval research in secret has reportedly said that UFOs have been responsible for the deaths of humans. David Grusch worked for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) and was involved with the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force. He claimed that some of the “non-human intelligences” discovered have malevolent intentions and have killed people. Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

When Apple unveils its latest iPhone on Tuesday, the European Union will have left its mark on the...

SHENZHEN, China--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jul 3, 2023--

E-commerce giant Amazon has said it uses artificial intelligence systems to prevent fake reviews on the platform that can intentionally mislead customers. While the company already uses machine learning models to detect risks such as links to other accounts, sign-in activity, review history, and other indications of unusual behavior that point to fake reviews, the tech giant said on Tuesday that is further investing in sophisticated fraud-detection tools. Using several such methods, the company said it “proactively blocked over 200 million suspected fake reviews” from its stores in 2022. “We will continue to build sophisticated tools that protect customers, our selling partners, and our store from bad actors that attempt to profit by proliferating fake reviews globally,” Amazon said. In the new statement, the e-commerce giant warned of the emergence of an illicit industry of “fake review brokers,” who approach consumers via social media channels, and messaging services, soliciting them to write fake reviews in exchange for money or other incentives. These brokers, according to Amazon, portray themselves as legitimate businesses with networks of hundreds of employees stationed worldwide. So far, it has taken legal action against over 90 such bad actors around the world who facilitated fake reviews and sued more than 10,000 Facebook group administrators who attempted to put fake reviews. It also reported over 23,000 abusive social media groups, with over 46 million members and followers, that facilitated fake reviews in 2022, the company added. These high-volume fake review brokers a “global problem” impacting multiple industries, according to Amazon, which called on the private sector, consumer groups, and governments to work together to stop fake review brokers. “Through cross-industry sharing – including information on bad actors’ tactics and techniques, who they are targeting, the services they provide, and how they operate – we can more effectively shut down these schemes, thereby protecting more consumers across different industries,” the company said. In countries that already have laws against soliciting fake reviews, it said regulators could do more to use their authority to take action against fake review brokers. “We also support greater funding for law enforcement to build further technical expertise to investigate and take down these brokers,” the multibillion-dollar conglomerate said. “Amazon will continue to protect our stores from fake reviews by investing in proactive tools to detect and stop fake reviews from impacting a customer’s buying decision,” it added. Read More Revealed: The delivery apps charging you double for your food shop Amazon staff spied on women private through Ring cameras, officials say ‘Last Beatles record’ was created using AI, says Paul McCartney Best Amazon deals and offers to buy now, from air fryers to Apple watches Jeff Bezos mocked for spending $4k on bottle of ‘engagement wine’ worth just $650 Elon Musk is once again world’s richest person

BOCA RATON, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 11, 2023--

SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jul 18, 2023--