harlekin.me

Kai Fu Lee über future deve­lo­p­ment trajectories.

I think Chi­na and the US will be neck on neck for the next five years in various types of AI. Chi­na will be ahead in some are­as: Face reco­gni­ti­on, speech reco­gni­ti­on, machi­ne trans­la­ti­on, dro­nes. US will be ahead in cer­tain are­as: Auto­no­mous vehi­cles, busi­ness AI - US, Euro­pe and Japan may be ahead in robo­tics - so its case by case, but if you think of it as one pie with a dol­lar sign on it, Chi­na and the US will each take a very lar­ge pie­ce, thats the likely out­co­me. I also think that chi­ne­se com­pa­nies will go natu­ral­ly bey­ond chi­ne­se boar­ders.
[…]
So I anti­ci­pa­te the­re to be a likely bifur­ca­ti­on […] whe­re rough­ly half the world will be using most­ly ame­ri­can soft­ware and half of the world will be most­ly using chi­ne­se soft­ware - in about 5 years time.

(time­code:  00:10:39) 

Sounds about right. 😉

Auch das state­ment über pri­va­cy, AI, und data collec­tion eini­ge Minu­ten spä­ter ist abso­lut korrekt.

Eben­so die Über­le­gun­gen bezüg­lich uni­ver­sal basic inco­me gegen Ende des Vortrags.

edit: Als Zusatz hier noch Peter Alt­mai­er, beim rhe­to­ri­schen drü­ber Hin­wegstol­pern, dass die EU zwar die meis­ten AI rese­arch paper in der offe­nen Wis­sen­schaft pro­du­ziert, dann aber alle Abgän­ger an die Big Five US Unter­neh­men ver­liert - da die auch die gefüll­ten Daten­ban­ken für Deep Lear­ning haben. Motivationsrede. 🙂

… in einem ein­wö­chi­gen Semi­nar in Alp­bach zu den “neu­en online Arbeits­märk­ten”. Ande­re Quel­len ftw. 😉

Nach­trag: Mehr Kon­text: click

… a T-Shirt and an app at a time. 🙂

Hier das Kon­zept, sechs Jah­re zuvor: click

Blog: click

… try­ing to get us to reeva­lua­te some ide­as. Als kur­ze Synopsis… 😉

Nach­trag:

Hier ein län­ge­rer Aus­zug aus dem Vor­wort (im Wesent­li­chen ein short sum­me­ry) von Maz­zu­ca­tos vor­her­ge­gan­ge­nem Werk das, dem obe­ren Inter­view nach, bereits auf poli­ti­sche Reso­nanz gesto­ßen ist. 🙂

Yet, glo­ba­liz­a­ti­on and infor­ma­ti­on tech­no­lo­gy have enab­led pro­fits to migra­te to low tax regi­ons or even wit­hin tax havens. It is clear that inno­va­ti­on is nee­ded in the tax sys­tem to ensu­re that high-risk public spen­ding can con­ti­nue to gua­ran­tee future pri­va­te inno­va­ti­on. […]
The other direc­tion for public sec­tor inno­va­ti­on rela­tes to ‘green’ tech­no­lo­gy. It is my own con­vic­tion that other than saving the pla­net, the green direc­tion can, if pro­per­ly sup­por­ted, save the eco­no­my. By trans­forming con­sump­ti­on and pro­duc­tion pat­terns and revam­ping exis­ting struc­tures and infra­st­ruc­tures, green tech­no­lo­gy can gene­ra­te eco­no­mic growth and long-term envi­ron­men­tal sus­taina­bi­li­ty. ‘Green growth’ can have an impact equi­va­lent to what sub­ur­ba­niz­a­ti­on and post­war recon­struc­tion did to unleash the gol­den age in the West on the basis of the ‘Ame­ri­can way of life’. It is impos­si­ble for the new mil­li­ons of con­su­mers being incor­po­ra­ted into the glo­bal eco­no­my to find well­being fol­lowing the energy- and materials-intensive path explo­i­ted in the past. The limits to resour­ces plus the thre­at of glo­bal war­ming could eit­her beco­me a power­ful bra­ke against the glo­ba­liz­a­ti­on pro­cess or the most power­ful dri­ver of growth, employ­ment and inno­va­ti­on in a genera­ti­on. […]
This brings us to the third les­son: […] As Keynes right­ly argued, government must beco­me the inves­tor of last resort when the pri­va­te sec­tor free­zes. But in the modern know­ledge eco­no­my it is not enough to invest in infra­st­ruc­tu­re or to gene­ra­te demand for the expan­si­on of pro­duc­tion. If inno­va­ti­on has always been – as Schum­pe­ter said – the for­ce dri­ving growth in the mar­ket eco­no­my, it is even more cri­ti­cal in the infor­ma­ti­on age to con­ti­nue to direct public resour­ces into cata­ly­sing innovation.

Car­lo­ta Perez in - The Entre­pre­neu­ri­al Sta­te by Maria­na Maz­zu­ca­to, 2013

Futu­rist phi­lo­so­pher Yuval Noah Hara­ri, zur Zeit einer der intel­lek­tu­el­len Dar­lings der kali­for­ni­schen Tech Sze­ne - in einem hoch­pro­vo­kan­ten NYT Por­trait, sowie in eige­nen Wor­ten in einem “Talk at Goog­le” (gehal­ten vor etwa einem Monat).

Aus­zug aus dem NYT Portrait:

[On Aldous Hux­ley] Genera­ti­ons have been hor­ri­fied by his novel “Bra­ve New World,” which depicts a regime of emo­ti­on con­trol and pain­less con­sump­ti­on. Rea­ders who encoun­ter the book today, Mr. Hara­ri said, often think it sounds gre­at. “Ever­ything is so nice, and in that way it is an intel­lec­tual­ly dis­tur­bing book becau­se you’re real­ly hard-pressed to exp­lain what’s wrong with it,” he said. “And you do get today a visi­on com­ing out of some peop­le in Sili­con Val­ley which goes in that direction.”

An Alpha­bet media rela­ti­ons mana­ger later reached out to Mr. Harari’s team to tell him to tell me that the visit to X was not allo­wed to be part of this sto­ry. The request con­fu­sed and then amu­sed Mr. Hara­ri. It is inte­res­ting, he said, that unli­ke poli­ti­ci­ans, tech com­pa­nies do not need a free press, sin­ce they alrea­dy con­trol the means of mes­sa­ge distribution.

src: click

Und wo wir gera­de bei uner­war­te­ten Dys­to­pien sind 😉 : click

Sir Tim Berners-Lee laun­ches a new initia­ti­ve, Solid, that aims to reset the con­nec­ted world in citi­zens’ favour

src: click

Tim Berners-Lee zum Pro­jekt: click

John Bruce über die Initia­ti­ve: click

Funk­tio­niert nur lei­der nicht. Da es Initia­ti­ve beim End­an­wen­der erfor­dert. Und nicht ein­fach genug ist. Und gegen das geht, was Wer­be­trei­ben­de heu­te bereits in grö­ße­rem Umfang, zu einem gerin­ge­ren Kos­ten­fak­tor, von bekann­te­ren Unter­neh­men erhalten.

Wür­de eini­ge Din­ge ver­bes­sern und neue Öko­no­mien ent­ste­hen lassen.

Offi­zi­el­le Web­page: https://solid.inrupt.com/
Git­hub: https://github.com/solid/solid

Augen­zwin­kern­des “fol­low up” auf den letz­ten Beitrag. 🙂

Aus dem März die­sen Jahres:

They put out a call in March for reb­ran­ding pro­po­sals, asking: “How can the Euro­pean Uni­on be valued by its citi­zens and be reco­gni­zed as a for­ce for good, rather than as a faceless bureau­cra­cy?” They reques­ted ide­as “for com­mu­ni­ca­ting the advan­ta­ges of coope­ra­ti­on and friendship amongst peop­le and nati­ons.” More than 400 pro­po­sals from 43 coun­tries pou­red in. A Ger­man fashion desi­gner had an idea for a uni­sex jacket that would ser­ve as a ticket for public trans­por­ta­ti­on in all 28 mem­ber states.

src: click