Newsletter Subject

Are we headed for an AI winter?

From

bloombergbusiness.com

Email Address

noreply@mail.bloombergbusiness.com

Sent On

Mon, Jun 18, 2018 11:05 AM

Email Preheader Text

From Greetings folks. This is Jeremy in London. Artificial Intelligence is having a moment

[Bloomberg] [Fully Charged]( From [Bloomberg](   [FOLLOW US [Facebook Share]]([Twitter Share]( [SUBSCRIBE [Subscribe]](  Greetings folks. This is Jeremy in London. Artificial Intelligence is having a moment in this city. Last week, to coincide with [London Tech Week](, an annual showcase of the city’s digital prowess, it hosted [CogX](, a 6,000-person-strong event that bills itself the “Festival of All Things AI,” and the [AI Summit London](, which lays claim to the mantle of “the world’s largest AI event for business.” The events have non-stop panels, parties, and big-name sponsors like SoftBank, Accenture, IBM and Google. Underpinning much of the buzz over artificial intelligence in London and elsewhere is the implicit premise that AI is the transformative technology of the moment, or maybe of the decade, or even of the century or, well, just about ever. Promises like the AI Summit’s claim that the technology goes “beyond the hype” to “deliver real value in business” only drives the corporate feeding frenzy among executives desperate not to be left behind. But there is something else going on “beyond the hype,” something that ought to be disconcerting for AI boosters: Among those closest to the cutting edge of machine learning, there is a sense–perhaps a faint but creeping suspicion—that deep learning, the techniques which underpin most of what people think of as ground-breaking AI, may not deliver on its promise. For one thing, there's a growing consensus among AI researchers that deep learning alone will probably not get us to artificial general intelligence (the idea of a single piece of software that is more intelligent than humans at a wide variety of tasks). But there’s also a growing fear that AI may not create systems that are reliably useful for even a narrower set of real-world challenges, like autonomous driving or making investment decisions. Filip Piekniewski, an expert on computer vision in San Diego who is currently the principal AI scientist for Koh Young Technology Inc, a company the builds 3D measurement devices, recently kicked off a debate with a [viral blog post]( predicting a looming “[AI Winter](,” a period of disillusionment and evaporating funding for AI-related research. "(The field has experienced several such periods over the past half-century.) Piekniewski’s evidence? The pace of AI breakthroughs seems to be slowing and those breakthroughs that are occurring seem to require ever-larger amounts of data and computer power. Several top AI researchers—such as Andrew Ng and Yann LeCun—who had been hired by big tech firms (Baidu and Facebook respectively) to head in-house AI labs have [left]( (Ng) or moved into slightly [less prominent roles]( (LeCun). And most importantly, Piekniewski argues that the recent [crashes]( of self-driving cars point to fundamental issues with the ability of deep learning to handle the complexity of the real world. Even more notable than the crashes, he says, is how often machines lose confidence in their ability to make safe decisions and cede control back to human drivers. Piekniewski also references the work of New York University’s Gary Marcus, who earlier this year published [a much-discussed paper]( critiquing the failings of today’s deep learning systems. This software, Marcus argues, can identify objects in images, but lacks any model of the real world. As a result, they often can’t handle new situations, even if they are very similar to the ones they’ve been trained to perform. For instance, the DeepMind algorithm that performs so well at the Atari game “Breakout”—and which the company often highlights in public presentations—does terribly if it is suddenly presented with a different-sized paddle, whereas a top human player would likely find the larger paddle wasn’t much of a handicap. Piekniewski’s AI winter warning has drummed up much protest from AI enthusiasts, but there are other signs a touch of frost in the air. John Langford, a machine learning researcher at Microsoft, recently wrote a blog warning that AI research was in a bubble, concluding “there is a chance for something traumatic for both the people and field when/where there is a sudden cut-off.” Martin Daum, chief executive officer of Daimler Trucks, [lowered expectations]( for how soon autonomous trucks would be commercially viable. And an index of hedge funds using AI-driven strategies has badly [lagged]( the S&P 500 since the start of the year—with many speculating that these systems, often trained on data drawn from our recent ultra-low interest rate environment, cannot handle a market where rates are starting to rise. Even LeCun thinks a winter could be coming if endowing AI with more human-like generality “takes longer than the people funding our research expect,” he told me at a [Bloomberg conference]( in late May. But he also [said]( that if it did happen, it wouldn’t be as severe as previous funding droughts. That’s because existing machine learning systems can actually perform a wide-range of fairly narrow but very useful tasks better than people. “There is a huge industry right now around the current technology of machine learning and that is not going away,” LeCun said. AI tools are already having an impact in industries like precision farming, insurance underwriting and even medicine, Paul Daugherty, Accenture’s chief technology and innovation officer, told me last week. “These systems don’t have be smarter than a human,” he said. “They just have to be able to solve a problem that hasn’t been solved before.” If the technology lives up to even a fraction of its promise, perhaps the goosebumps some in the industry are feeling will turn out to be the sun just momentarily passing behind a cloud, and not the north winds of winter starting to gather. —[Jeremy Kahn](mailto:jkahn21@bloomberg.net)  And here’s what you need to know in global technology news Scooter startup Bird is cashing in on the hype. Just weeks ago it raised money with an eye-popping $1 billion valuation. Now, it’s raising [twice the money at twice the valuation](—an unprecedented fundraising sprint for such a young company.  Another partner has left venture firm Social Capital. Arjun Sethi [will depart the firm](, co-founded by early Facebook employee Chamath Palihapitiya, in a year’s time. The announcement follows the resignations of two of the firm's other co-founders last year.  Norway, one of Tesla’s biggest markets, wants to become a [pioneer]( of electric planes.    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Bloomberg Technology newsletter Fully Charged. You can tell your friends to [sign up here](.  [Unsubscribe]( | [Bloomberg.com]( | [Contact Us]( Bloomberg L.P. 731 Lexington, New York, NY, 10022

Marketing emails from bloombergbusiness.com

View More
Sent On

25/05/2024

Sent On

24/05/2024

Sent On

24/05/2024

Sent On

24/05/2024

Sent On

23/05/2024

Sent On

23/05/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2024 SimilarMail.