It seems the first AI race has started, after Microsoft noted that ChatGPT, and other technologies from OpenAI, would be part of its future. Google, understanding that its future is a click away, is planning a high-voltage reaction to ensure no one does to it what it did to Yahoo. As I wrote after using ChatGPT, Google is on a collision to an existential threat because ChatGPT serves the meal while Google Search tells you where to buy the groceries to make the food. Yes, Google provides links while ChatGPT which can also provide links in future, gives a summary. With that summary, most users will be happy, and stop clicking, shifting their expectations from search technologies.

Time had an interview with the CEO of DeepMind , a category-king AI company, which Google parent company Alphabet acquired a few years ago, and which has been known to be playing games and beating the best gamers. Time wrote:

‘[Demis Hassabis] says that DeepMind is also considering releasing its own chatbot, called Sparrow, for a “private beta” some time in 2023. (The delay is in order for DeepMind to work on reinforcement learning-based features that ChatGPT lacks, like citing its sources. “It’s right to be cautious on that front,” Hassabis says.) But he admits that the company may soon need to change its calculus. “We’re getting into an era where we have to start thinking about the freeloaders, or people who are reading but not contributing to that information base,” he says. “And that includes nation states as well.” He declines to name which states he means—“it’s pretty obvious, who you might think”—but he suggests that the AI industry’s culture of publishing its findings openly may soon need to end.’

The race begins and the winner will take the castle. There could be extrapolatory alignments since AI will seed the technology startups of the future. Indeed, if Amazon AWS does not have an answer, this redesign can distort and disintermediate its marketing positioning, since it is evident that Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure have set their ladders into that near future. Simply, most startups may integrate to use these cloud providers for access to these artificial brains!

If you are looking for comparisons, go here: OpenAI GPT-3 v/s DeepMind Gato: Destructing AGI

The hi-tech companies such as OpenAI and DeepMind are fully focused on robust AI systems with artificial general intelligence (AGI) but the tech market considers that they are not capable of AGI. They may be so determined on AGI that they are killing the hopes of experiencing AGI. Both OpenAI and DeepMind are working on the AGI through GPT-3 and Gato for a long period of time. But these companies are not capable of addressing the first problem in solving complex problems of AGI that includes artificial intelligence models learning new things without any training data. Gato can consist of the potential to perform better in the consumer market but there are no viable entry points for AGI.

AGI does not need the pre-trained data for learning new things. But one can reap the benefits of Gato— playing 600 different games in a video game console. GPT-3 and Gato both need hard filters to eradicate faults and flaws like bias, racism, and abusive language to put the outcome consistently. Meanwhile, AGI is known for powering intelligent machines to mimic human tasks— understand, learn, as well as perform intellectual tasks. It can study the human mind and solve any complex problem with cognitive computing functionalities.

Both of these tech companies are facing key challenges of AGI such as issues in learning human-centric capabilities such as sensory perception, motor skills, problem-solving, human-level creativity, etc., lack of working protocol, reducing universality, lacking business alignment, and lacking AGI direction.  

Comment on Feed

Comment 1: As the world shifts to AI technology, ironically more and more issues around the humane, ethical aspects of AI technology would become front-burner issues. For instance, to what extent should AI furnish us with information on requests that may portend harm to others?

I posed a question on ChatGPT and I liked how it called my attention to the ethical considerations around the question. And even after engaging it further to explain my perspective, it still maintained its position in its subsequent responses.

Of course, there are also reports where the AI allegedly gives incorrect information or misrepresents the true meaning of texts in its original source.

In Google, some sites are even flagged as not to be trusted. Some we already know we shouldn’t trust by experience. In open AI, how do we tell the difference?

In the age of open AI, what would governance around protecting the vulnerability of humans in situations like this look like? And who will make the call on what is white, black, or grey? AI?

AI needs to be developed with these in the minds of the programmers even before being tested, otherwise we would create serious unintended consequences in the future.

I love this new age, it’s more fun than I anticipated!

Comment 2: I cannot agree any less sir. I am wondering what the Chinese are cooking as well. This is indeed the era of AI.
AWS will definitely come out with their solution as well, they have so much to loose should they fail to respond with their own technology.

The big question I have though is can Africa find thier way into the map of AI superpowers?

My Response: We just need to have 24/7 electricity. That is our AI race right now, from Nigeria to South Africa and beyond!

The Ghanaian government has imposed a $773 million fine on MTN Ghana for ‘deceitfully’ underpaying its taxes in four years, a move that has been widely seen as a ploy to generate revenue by the cash-strapped country.

MTN said the back-tax bill, which includes penalties and interest charges, covers between 2014 and 2018, when the company allegedly under-declared its revenue in Ghana by 30%, according to the notice it received this week.

Africa’s largest wireless network said it believes the taxes were paid and intends to contest the penalties.

“MTN Ghana believes that the taxes due have been paid during the period under assessment and has resolved to vigorously defend MTN Ghana’s position on the assessment,” the company said.

It added that the Ghana Revenue Authority used a third-party consultant as well as a new methodology.

“MTN Ghana strongly disputes the accuracy and basis of the assessment, including the methodology used in conducting the audit,” the company said.

But MTN has been here before. In 2018, Nigeria’s Attorney General, Abubakar Malami, accused MTN Nigeria of failing to pay $2bn in taxes and penalties. MTN contested and won the case after it was withdrawn in 2020.

However, the tax bill from the Ghanaian tax authority is believed to be born from desperate need to fill its empty treasury. Ghana’s economy took a drastic downturn with its currency, cedis, ranking as the world’s worst-performing currency last year. The West African country’s inflation rate has risen 54.1%, making means of living unaffordable.

In December, Ghana announced it’s suspending payments on most of its external debt, including its Eurobonds, commercial loans and most bilateral loans, in a decision the country described as an “interim emergency measure.” This is despite securing a $3 billion financing agreement with the International Monetary Fund.

Other measures the nation has adopted to tame its economic crisis include a strategy it announced in November, that will see the nation buy oil products using gold rather than U.S. dollar reserves. The plan is to protect Ghana’s foreign exchange reserve from declining further due to intense pressure from dollar demand by oil importers.

Ghana’s economic outlook is projected to slow in 2023, compounding its challenges. Against this backdrop, there is belief that MTN Ghana is being scapegoated with the back-tax bill.

MTN said in the statement that it is working with GRA to resolve the matter. It said the tax agency had begun an audit of its Ghanaian business in 2019 to look into the “reliability and completeness” of the revenue it declared during the five-year period, according to Bloomberg.

“The GRA hadn’t issued the unit with any guidelines or standards relating to its new audit methodology,” MTN said.

We make consequential professional decisions about our careers. And most times, we seek help, from those we think that may know better. When I seek professional advice from people, I never  ask them to make the decisions for me. Largely, I only want them to help me understand variables, components, pieces and other elements which I may not know, and could be catalytic, for me to make the best decision, under the prevailing circumstances.

Sure, we like the professional mentor  to tell us what to do. Which university to select? – UNN; which company to choose?- MTN ; which country to emigrate to – Canada; etc. You want the answers direct and in an unambiguous way.

That is wrong. There is no way any individual will know everything about your background, and circumstances which could affect the choice of a university, a company, a country to choose, etc. The best an individual can do is to deepen your understanding of the university system and performance, opportunities in sectors and companies, and promises in global economies and  countries. Then, you can analyze using those  endogenous factors to arrive at the best call.

Indeed, sometimes, we feel let down by “suggestions” or “advice” given to us, from others, which we took line, hook and sinker, without any modulation, after years have passed. To avoid such feelings and get better at making decisions, change your style: do not ask for direct and specific decisions, rather, ask for clarifications on issues which, after you have processed them, will help you make the decisions, by yourself.

Yes indeed, personal responsibility is key. And firms on missions must discover their calls.