Elon Musk wants to build the ultimate AI business

Rate this post

This week’s headlines

  • The Pentagon wants beef Its automated drone army with some AI. File it under things that keep you up at night.
  • OpenAI has admitted that the AI ​​text detector Usually does not work. cool
  • AI-fueled fear Political manipulation Increase, Google has declared Any political ads hosted on its platform must disclose whether they use AI. I’m not sure if that really solves the problem, but it’s a nice gesture.
  • UNESCO, the UN’s specialized agency that focuses on arts, culture and education, has insisted Government to regulate generative AI in schools. I doubt they noticed how terrible ChatGPT is for colleges in the US, where students are using it to cheat like there’s no tomorrow.
  • Last but not least: introduced by two US senators Bilateral law To regulate AI. One of them is Josh Hawley, who doesn’t have the best Tech Policy track record in the world.

Top story: Elon’s Ultimate AI Corporation

Image for article titled AI This Week: Elon Musk's AI-dominated Future

Illustration: thongyhod (Shutterstock)

Over the past decade, Elon Musk has invested heavily in a number of strange businesses, many of which have a dystopian tinge. from him Computer to Brain Interface Startup Neuralink, its pet Tesla project “Optimus,” bipedal RobotChatGPT creator OpenAI (J Musk Co-establishment), Musk has helped create a pantheon of quirky, science-based businesses actively flirting with the fringes of technological innovation. Now, Musk’s new biographer, Walter Isaacson, has speculated that many of these ventures are part of Musk’s broader plan to usher in a bold new era of artificial intelligence. in an article Published in Time, Isaacson argues that Musk’s various startup investments and business ventures are part of a broader strategy to promote the creation of “artificial general intelligence,” or AGI.

Not familiar with AGI? is the concept Definitely unclear. It basically claims the arrival of that terrifying AI future we’ve all dreamed (or nightmared) about—the “weirdness” where artificial intelligence isn’t just a rote system of human-led algorithmic manipulation (“Stochastic Parrot,” recent big language models have called), but a self-learning organic intelligence that reflects—or even exceeds—the kind that humans naturally possess.

During an interview with Isaacson, Musk made it clear to the author that he thinks his many different business ventures—such as Neuralink, Tesla’s Optimus, and a neural-network-training supercomputer called Dojo—could be tied together to “pursue the goal of artificial general intelligence.” .”

A key part of this alleged master plan could be Musk’s recent launch Another startup, xAI. Isaacson thinks Musk plans to fold several of his other businesses (including xAI and X, aka, the website formerly known as Twitter) — which Musk Purchased last year $44 billion) in a large business. The result could be a major artificial intelligence corporation designed to push technological boundaries beyond their current constraints.

however, Many critics Keep in mind that AGI is a long way off. Musk’s vision may be to become the techno-messiah that ushers in the robot revolution – accordingly Numerous science fiction films-Eventually mankind will perish, the jury is still out on whether this is possible in the near, or even, distant future. Isaacson’s book on Musk, on the other hand, is available shortly. There is a character Out of payment Next Tuesday.

Interview: Michael Brooks on the challenges ahead for the robotaxis industry

Image for an article titled AI This Week: Elon Musk's AI-dominated Future

Photograph: Auto Safety Center

This week’s interview includes a recent conversation with Michael Brooks, executive director of the Auto Safety Center. Michael’s organization has done it repeatedly Criticized Concerned about the self-driving car industry and the potential road hazards it poses. While GM’s Cruise and Google’s Waymo recently Got to move on San Francisco (a big step In the evolution of the self-driving car industry), we thought this would be a good opportunity to talk to Michael about the challenges posed by automated road travel. This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.

What do you think of the recent developments with Cruise and Waymo in San Francisco?

There’s been a lot going on lately…I think San Francisco is really waking up to the fact that there’s a problem here. I think they’re starting to ask the question: ‘Why do we really need this? Why is there a need for extra vehicles on the roads that are obstructing traffic?’ But, you know, at the same time Cruise is expanding across America. They’re in Raleigh, they’re in Austin. There are many other cities in other states where they are going to be present.

Have you been observing how the self-driving car industry is trying to shape the regulatory environment surrounding their vehicles??

One thing the auto industry has tried to do across the country is control policies at the state level. What it does is it takes away the ability of the fire chief or the police chief in San Francisco to say, ‘Hey, these cars need to be off my street today. There are security issues.’ It is at the heart of the DMV (what was expressed) and Public utility hearing In SF… the people who live in these cities and experience the negative effects of these cars have no voice or any control over whether they are deployed on their streets. It’s a regulatory setup that autonomous vehicle companies like. Cities and states sometimes have significant political differences, and car manufacturers know that it will be very difficult for cities to fight (against states) when they are in that position. So they like the idea of ​​a state regulatory environment — for now. Ultimately, they want a federal plan that prevents the state from doing anything. I think the power that states feel can be fleeting.

There has been much discussion about the potential of self-driving vehicles to reduce road fatalities. Do you think, hypothetically, there are any public health benefits here?

Hypothetically, there are. However, if the vehicles are to be deployed more widely they will need to be tested at speeds higher than 30 mph (30 mph is the speed at which Cruise was recently approved for commercial operations in San Francisco; Waymo, meanwhile, was approved at 65 mph. for travel up to). We see a lot of death and destruction at high speeds – and that’s where many real human decisions and mistakes are made. Autonomous vehicles need attention if they want to become something humans can use across the country. Currently, the best-case scenario for this technology is very short trips on closed courses where it won’t scare them and they know they’ll have a WiFi signal and won’t be running through concrete. Things happen so fast in high speed car crashes; Without testing cars in that environment and demonstrating that they have some sort of safety advantage, it’s hard to know what will happen to these products in the future.

Catch up on all Here’s Gizmodo’s AI newsor see All the latest news here. For daily updates, Subscribe to the free Gizmodo newsletter.

Leave a Comment