Latest news with #A.I
USA Today
21-07-2025
- Business
- USA Today
Ignazio Arces Wins Silver Stevie Award in New York as Culture Transformation Leader of the Year
Winners in Stevie® Awards for Great Employers were announced. The awards recognize the world's best employers and the human resources professionals, teams, achievements, and HR-related products and suppliers who help to create and drive great places to work. Jul. 21, 2025 / PRZen / NEW YORK — Ignazio Arces, a Sicilian executive, has been awarded the Silver Stevie® Award in the category Culture Transformation Leader of the Year at the. One of the most prestigious international recognitions in the field of leadership and cultural transformation, the award will be presented on One of the judges remarked: 'Ignazio Arces embodies culture transformation at the highest level, blending industrial reinvention with human-centered leadership.' Arces is the author of 'Navigating the Energy Transition: Leadership Insights for the Energy Revolution,' published in September 2024. The book, already acclaimed in academic and managerial circles, offers a deep analysis of energy as not only a technical lever but also an ethical, social, and cultural one. 'Receiving this recognition is an honor, but also a responsibility, one that is measured by the ability to transform mindsets, language, and purpose in a sector long defined by certainty,' Arces commented. Source: A.I. Follow the full story here:
News18
02-07-2025
- Entertainment
- News18
Steven Spielberg Speaks Out Against AI Use In Filmmaking: ‘Don't Want It To Make Creative Decision'
Steven Spielberg opposed the idea of using AI in the writing process. Legendary Hollywood filmmaker Steven Spielberg, who made the 2001 sci-fi film A.I, has made it clear that he doesn't want artificial intelligence interfering with creative storytelling. The director shared his thoughts on the importance of human intuition and creativity in storytelling. He vehemently opposed the idea of using AI in the writing process. During his appearance at an event in California, Spielberg said, 'I do not want AI to make creative decisions that I cannot make myself. And I don't want to use AI as a non-human colleague in order to work out my creative thinking." His statement came 24 years after he made the film, AI Artificial Intelligence. It follows the story of a humanoid robot who encounters love, loss, and sentience. The film predicted the present-day development and the rapid growth of AI technology. Addressing the theme of the film, Spielberg noted that today's AI is far more advanced than he had imagined in his movie. 'The focus was not on artificial intelligence, but rather on sentient existence. It was not exactly where AI is bringing us now. Eventually, AI and robotics will converge," said the filmmaker. Spielberg added that while AI may benefit humanity in some areas, humans should continue to be in charge of creative work. The legendary director shared that he has seen how technology can replace human talent while working on the 1993 film, Jurassic Park. The filmmaker said, 'That kind of made certain careers somewhat extinct. So, I'm very sensitive to things that AI may do to take work away from people." Lastly, Spielberg acknowledged that he has not employed AI in his films as of now, although he is open to using it in other areas such as budgeting and planning. 'I don't want to use it in front of the camera right now. Not quite yet," Spielberg said. Spielberg is known for iconic films like Schindler's List, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Jurassic Park, Lincoln and Jaws. His last directorial was the 2022 coming-of-age drama film, The Fabelmans, featuring Michelle Williams and Paul Dano in the leads. Steven Spielberg is an executive producer in Jurassic World: Rebirth, releasing in theaters on July 2. First Published:
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
iHeartRadio Music Festival 2025: Ed Sheeran, Tate McRae, Mariah Carey to Perform
iHeartRadio Music Festival will return to the T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas on Sept. 19 and 20 with performances from Ed Sheeran, Tate McRae, Mariah Carey, Lil Wayne, Jelly Roll, and more. The event will be hosted by Ryan Seacrest, with both days of performances broadcast across iHeartMedia radio stations and streamed on Hulu. Additional performances will be announced in the months leading up to iHeartRadio Music Festival 2025. Currently, the lineup also features Bryan Adams, Feid, GloRilla, John Fogerty, Justice, LL Cool J, Sammy Hagar, the Offspring, and Tim McGraw. More from Rolling Stone Mariah Carey, Snoop Dogg, Jamie Foxx, Kirk Franklin Named BET Ultimate Icon Award Recipients Elton John Calls U.K. Government 'Absolute Losers' Over A.I. Copyright Plans Ed Sheeran Previews Collaboration With Dave Grohl, John Mayer General sale for the music festival will begin on Friday, June 13, at 11 a.m. PST via AXS. Tickets will be available in single-day and two-day packages. Sheeran's performance will follow the Sept. 12 release of his forthcoming studio album Play, which features the singles 'Old Phone' and 'Azizam.' The singer-songwriter has a number of live performances scheduled across Europe this summer, but iHeartRadio Music Festival is his only upcoming U.S. appearance at the moment. McRae's appearance will intersect with the North American leg of her Miss Possessive Tour, which touches down in North American in August in support of her latest studio album So Close to What. Meanwhile, Mariah Carey completed her latest Las Vegas residency last year to celebrate the 20th anniversary of The Emancipation of Mimi. She recently began teasing her 16th studio album. Lil Wayne will have plenty of new material to perform during his set. The rapper will release Tha Carter VI on Friday, June 6, accompanied by his first headlining appearance at Madison Square Garden. He also has performances scheduled for Memphis and Oklahoma City in September. Jelly Roll's performance at the music festival will follow his trek on the road with Post Malone for the Big Ass World Tour. Best of Rolling Stone The 50 Greatest Eminem Songs All 274 of Taylor Swift's Songs, Ranked The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
I Talked to the Writer Who Got Caught Publishing ChatGPT-Written Slop. I Get Why He Did It.
Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily. Over the past week, at least two venerable American newspapers—the Chicago Sun-Times and the Philadelphia Inquirer—published a 56-page insert of summer content that was in large part produced by A.I. The most glaring evidence was a now-notorious 'summer reading list,' which recommended 15 books, five of them real, 10 of them imaginary, with summaries of fake titles like Isabel Allende's Tidewater Dreams, Min Jin Lee's Nightshade Market, Rebecca Makkai's Boiling Point, and Percival Everett's The Rainmakers. The authors exist; the books do not. The rest of the section, which included anodyne listicles about summer activities, barbecuing, and photography, soon attracted additional scrutiny. Dr. Jennifer Campos, a purported professor of leisure studies at the University of Colorado and authority on 'hammock culture' on college campuses, did not appear to exist. Other experts cited on summery subjects like gardening and bonfires were similarly difficult to track down, and some real people whose prior remarks were cited did not appear to have said the things attributed to them. It was a sprawling, newspaper-length hallucination of ChatGPT. It's not the first time that a prestigious legacy publication has been caught farming out content to A.I., but for the sheer brazenness of its made-up summer book section, it may have set a new bar. The section was provided to both papers by King Features, a division of the newspaper and magazine giant Hearst that syndicates special sections, comics, puzzles, and so on. Many newspapers have long relied on such collaborations to fill out their pages, whether the syndication is war reports from the Associated Press or Popeye comic strips. In this case, a comms person at Chicago Public Media, which owns the Sun-Times along with local NPR station WBEZ, told 404Media that they don't typically vet those products independently because of their source: 'We falsely made the assumption there would be an editorial process for this.' The section's sole byline, from a Chicago writer named Marco Buscaglia, appears on nearly a dozen articles. When I spoke to him on the phone on Tuesday morning, Buscaglia was contrite about his mistakes, but not his methods. 'I have kind of accepted the fact that if somebody wants 60 pages' worth of stories, there has to be some sort of compromise. But it should be a good compromise. It should be an ethical compromise, and an obvious compromise. And I blew that.' Buscaglia's profile is interesting because he's not a tech guy trying to automate journalism jobs. He's a 56-year-old media lifer with two writing degrees trying to automate his own freelance job, using A.I. to maintain an impossible human workload of low-paid gigs. He's the victim of the previous downward spiral of paid writing jobs (thanks to the decline of ad dollars) turned perpetrator of the current downward spiral of paid writing jobs, wielding LLMs to perform a convincing impression of the 25-year-olds who would have crafted the summer heat special section in 1997, and distorting unscrupulous bosses' sense of what they can get for their money. And it was a relatively convincing impression. Buscaglia himself did not know about the errors until Tuesday morning, and the Sun-Times and the Inquirer did not issue any remarks until then. (The Inky's section was published back on May 15.) The A.I. slop of the Heat Index tells us much about the declining standards of print journalism, but it also holds lessons for the current plight of all journalism. Syndication was popular because it allowed local newspapers to get popular comic strips to their subscribers each morning. The better the comics, the more subscribers, and the more subscribers, the more money in advertising—which, at its peak in 2005, represented more than 80 percent of newspaper revenue. Syndicated games, columnists, and special sections followed in comics' footsteps. The fantastical Heat Index insert comprises the dying embers of this business. In its Chicago Sun-Times edition, there's just one advertisement: for the Goodman Theater's musical of The Color Purple (unlike the articles, the ad was apparently written by a human, and correctly notes the play was inspired by an Alice Walker novel). Ads were sold for human readers, and most readers are now online—and because the readers are online, an LLM-generated newspaper section persisted for days before someone noticed. This dual audience for the written word—readers and advertisers—has survived in digital media, and as with silly summer inserts, it's often the tail of advertising that wags the dog of text. This ad-supported digital ecosystem is the foundation of everything on the internet, news and otherwise, from the business models of Google and Facebook to the popularity of Daily Mail slideshows. Much attention so far has focused on A.I. wranglers like Buscaglia whose offerings can compete with those of human writers and illustrators. But just as important will be the decline in human readers, as web traffic shifts into robot-to-robot conversations. To the extent a source still wants to talk to a journalist, it may be to influence the results of LLM web-trawling—just as résumés are built by LLMs to be filtered by LLMs, and homework assignments and their grading are simultaneously outsourced to ChatGPT. A feedback loop begins. An early consequence for journalism comes from Google's A.I. Overview, which attempts (and sometimes comically fails) to answer questions on the search results page. Some online publishers say the practice is collapsing traffic to their sites, as searchers never follow through to the source of the information, whether on Slate, Wikipedia, ESPN, or IMDB. Users who ask questions inside an A.I. interface like ChatGPT may never see any other piece of the web at all. And who will buy ads if all that surfing is done by an LLM, not a human? At its developer conference on Tuesday, Google announced it would roll out an 'AI Mode' option in every search that will relegate much of today's browsing experience to the back end. The Verge summarizes this shift: 'Over time, Google seems to think of AI Mode and AI Overviews, and by extension Search as a whole, not as 'some text summarizing search results' but something more like a blank canvas for sharing information. Should some results be AI-generated videos or podcasts? Or automatically generated charts and graphs, which AI Mode can already create for you? What about a full, one-off web app, created by Gemini, just to help you answer the question you asked? What if, instead of just offering you some information about your question, Google could tap into Project Mariner and just go solve your problem for you? That's the future of search results, Google thinks, and it doesn't have much use for a page full of blue links.' Project Mariner, by the way, is a Google A.I. product that performs online transactions, such as buying baseball tickets or ordering groceries. Also on Tuesday, the company announced that Mariner will be available as part of a $250-a-month A.I. subscription plan. In his Stratechery newsletter, Ben Thompson lays out a potential vicious cycle in which a decline in human web traffic prompts a decline in human web creation. The current digital ads ecosystem 'depends on humans seeing those webpages, not impersonal agents impervious to advertising, which destroys the economics of ad-supported content sites, which, in the long run, dries up the supply of new content for AI.' A.I. can supply answers to questions because it has been trained on countless copyrighted sources of information, which is the subject of ongoing litigation. If it's bad at writing true information, it's because it is also bad at 'reading' it. Which brings us back to the Heat Index. If you Google another one of the Heat Index's fake books, The Last Algorithm by Andy Weir, you get an Amazon page for The Last Algorithm by Isaac Asimov—a Kindle-only product from February fraudulently advertised as a work by the late science-fiction great who died in 1992. If you Google the LLM-hallucinated hammock expert Jennifer Campos, the first result is the Inquirer insert. Fakery is encroaching. In some ways, the Heat Index points to where we're going, toward an internet of regurgitation, in which art and writing are composed of machine-processed fragments of what came before. But the uproar is a sign of something ending—a last gasp from the era of the diligent, human reader who can tell the difference between a real book and a fake one. Our robot readers are not so discerning.
Memri
20-05-2025
- Memri
Digital Eloi, Physical Morlocks
What will you do when you find out you're useless? That is probably the most important question that comes out from a recent viral video.[1] New York Times columnist Ross Douthat interviewed researcher Daniel Kokotajlo, the executive director of the A.I. Futures Project last week about where we will be in regards to Artificial Intelligence in the very near future. As soon as 2027 to be exact.[2] The predictions are, to put it mildly, wild and, for most, probably dire for people who do not own an AI company. Kokotajlo forecasts a world without work (for most humans), where – it is to be hoped – a viable Universal Basic Income (UBI) would somehow help people survive. Others are less negative and foresee unprecedented change but also "an age of human flourishing the likes of which we've never seen before."[3] There would be radical, really unprecedented change in the fields of economics, governance and society that would cause massive disruption. Human beings would become obsolete in terms of the marketplace but would supposedly face a future of mostly endless leisure, one which would almost lead to new crises, including a crisis over meaning.[4] That is if the machines do not just decide to dispense with humans altogether.[5] The video has generated some smart commentary. Catholic theologian Larry Chapp focused on the question of consciousness.[6] The powerful AI of the very near future will "act as if it is truly conscious" and will be treated as such. It can already lie and hallucinate and we do not quite know how it works or thinks. He suggests that this new mind could destroy the faith of millions as it will be spun that just as consciousness can be created, can be faked, so is the soul fake. That there is nothing special or unique or everlasting about us except, perhaps, what could be uploaded into a machine. Others have focused on the geopolitical, the big news from the President Trump state visit to the Middle East is that the United States will incorporate Saudi Arabia and the UAE into its AI ambitions as the Americans aim at AI dominance against China. The role of the energy and cash-rich Gulf states is key in overcoming one of the remaining bottlenecks in the growth of AI – datacenter capacity, with its insatiable demand for more and more massive electricity and energy generation.[7] Even if this does not begin to happen within two years, if it takes ten years, the ramifications of the expected changes seem to be, on the surface, shocking. But there is a major dimension in this discussion that I find strangely missing. What is being discussed is how this rapid technological change will impact – and certainly distort or even destroy – our society. The coming nightmare/dream is usually described in terms suggesting either a white-collar dystopia or a First World challenge of what to do with so much leisure and abundance. But most people on the planet are not to be found in middle class or above societies that dominate in the West. Seventeen percent of the globe's population is considered to be middle class, while 22 percent were either upper middle class (15 percent) or high income (seven percent).[8] Most people in existence today are low income or poor (61 percent).[9] I can – barely – understand the concept of mass unemployment being mitigated in the West by funding a UBI through taxing super wealthy tech companies that will flourish due to the coming AI bonanza. I find it hard to believe that those companies could fund an entire world without work. Perhaps the only jobs to go away in the Global South will be those that are directly part of the First World supply chain. Things like call centers and garment factories seem rife for replacement by advanced technology driven by AI. While conceivably robot cowboys[10] and mechanical herders overseeing livestock could replace humans performing those functions in America and Europe, would the same happen in places like South Sudan or Somalia, both places with considerable livestock – handled the old-fashioned ways – and lacking basics like roads, electricity, and communications connectivity?[11] Does that even make economic sense? Would the fall of the "good jobs" mean the survival of subsistence levels of economic activity in the poor countries and marginalized communities of the world? When human-generated office work disappears, will the physical work of the farm and the ranch in distant places remain or is that also to be automated? Having seen Central American peasants tilling their milpa cornfields or tribesmen in Sudan caring for and driving their herds to water during the changing seasons in an unforgiving climate, it is hard to believe that this sort of basic, subsistence activity would be disrupted.[12] What could happen would be a deepening of the existing gaps and fissures in the human experience. On one side would be a tiny elite of incredible wealth and – perhaps – a population benefiting from their proximity to the new wealth-generating centers (whether through taxes or UBI or from the crumbs that fall from the master's table). On the other side of the divide would be those even more disconnected from the flourishing, dominant global economic system, thrown to their own devices to survive or perish as best they can. These two worlds would, over time develop different types of people. Again, a reminder comes from South Sudan – a country with a very high infant mortality rate – where the children of Nilotic tribes that do reach adulthood are often very tall, impressive individuals that grew up strong on the milk and meat of their long-horned cattle. Westerners eternally on the dole could well develop into fat and soft distracted online addicts of porn and games, stupefied by USDA-provided weed. In H.G. Wells' famous The Time Machine (1895), a work influenced by the Industrial Revolution, the far future sees two types of humans: the descendants of the old elite – the Eloi, fair and innocent and the powerful apelike Morlocks, descended from the lower, working classes. We eventually learn to our horror that the Eloi have become the cattle of the cannibalistic Morlocks. We do not need to go that far into speculative fiction to ask whether the coming tech changes will lead to the development of two, less fictional, human types much sooner – one soft, entitled, and coddled in the virtual lotusland and another, harder type, grounded, and honed by bitter survival, one that will say, like Dostoevsky's Underground Man, "sometimes, it is very pleasant too to smash things." *Alberto M. Fernandez is Vice President of MEMRI.
