Masayoshi Son, chairman and chief executive officer of SoftBank Group Corp., speaks during the company's annual general meeting in Tokyo, Japan, on Friday, June 20, 2024. Son sketched out ambitions to help create AI thousands of times smarter than any human, making his most grandiose pronouncements since the Japanese conglomerate began taking steps to shore up its finances following a series of ill-timed startup bets.

Kosuke Okahara | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Artificial intelligence that is 10,000 times smarter than humans will be here in 10 years, SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son said on Friday, in a rare public appearance during which he questioned his own purpose in life.

Son laid out his vision for a world featuring artificial super intelligence, or ASI, as he dubbed it.

The CEO first talked about another term artificial general intelligence, or AGI which broadly refers to AI that is smarter than humans. Son said this tech is likely to be one to 10 times smarter than humans and will arrive in the next three-to-five years, earlier than he had anticipated.

But if AGI is not much smarter than humans, "then we don't need to change the way of living, we don't need to change the structure of human lifestyle," Son said, according to a live translation of his comments in Japanese, which were delivered during SoftBank's annual general meeting of shareholders.

"But when it comes to ASI it's a totally different story. [With] ASI, you will see a big improvement."

Son discussed how the future will hold various ASI models that interact with each other, like neurons in a human brain. This will lead to AI that is 10,000 times smarter than any human genius, according to Son.

SoftBank shares closed down more than 3% in Japan, following the meeting.

Son is SoftBank's founder, who rose to prominence after an early and profitable investment in Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba. He positioned SoftBank as a tech visionary with the 2017 launch of the Vision Fund, a massive investment fund focused on backing tech firms. While some of the bets were successful, there were also many high-profile failures, such as office sharing company WeWork.

After posting then-record financial losses at Vision Fund in 2022, Son said that SoftBank would go into "defense" mode and be more conservative with its investments. In 2023, the Vision Fund posted a new record loss, with Son shortly after saying that SoftBank would now shift into "offense," because he was excited about the investment opportunities in AI.

Son has been broadly out of the public eye since then.

He returned to the spotlight on Friday to deliver a speech that was full of existential questions.

"Two years ago, I am getting old, rest of my life is limited, but I haven't done anything yet and I cried so hard," Son said, suggesting he feels he hasn't achieved anything of consequence to date.

He added that he had now found SoftBank's mission, which is the "evolution of humanity." He also said he has discovered his own purpose in life.

"SoftBank was founded for what purpose? For what purpose was Masa Son born? It may sound strange, but I think I was born to realize ASI. I am super serious about it," Son said.

Continued here:

SoftBank CEO says AI that is 10000 times smarter than humans will come out in 10 years - CNBC

One of the most prominent narratives about AGI, or artificial general intelligence, in the popular media these days is the AI doomer narrative. This claims that were in the midst of an arms race to build AGI, propelled by a relatively small number of extremely powerful AI companies like DeepMind, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Elon Musks xAI (which aims to design an AGI that uncovers truths about the universe by eschewing political correctness). All are backed by billions of dollars: DeepMind says that Microsoft will invest over $100 billion in AI, while OpenAI has thus far received $13 billion from Microsoft, Anthropic has $4 billion in investments from Amazon, and Musk just raised $6 billion for xAI.

Many doomers argue that the AGI race is catapulting humanity toward the precipice of annihilation: if we create an AGI in the near future, without knowing how to properly align the AGIs value system, then the default outcome will be total human extinction. That is, literally everyone on Earth will die. And since it appears that were on the verge of creating AGI or so they say this means that you and I and everyone we care about could be murdered by a misaligned AGI within the next few years.

These doomers thus contend, with apocalyptic urgency, that we must pause or completely ban all research aiming to create AGI. By pausing or banning this research, it would give others more time to solve the problem of aligning AGI to our human values, which is necessary to ensure that the AGI is sufficiently safe. Failing to do this means that the AGI will be unsafe, and the most likely consequence of an unsafe AGI will be the untimely death of everyone on our planet.

The doomers contrast with the AI accelerationists, who hold a much more optimistic view. They claim that the default outcome of AGI will be a bustling utopia: well be able to cure diseases, solve the climate crisis, figure out how to become immortal, and even colonize the universe. Consequently, these accelerationists some of whom use the acronym e/acc (pronounced ee-ack) to describe their movement argue that we should accelerate rather than pause or ban AGI research. There isnt enough money being funneled into the leading AI companies, and calls for government regulation are deeply misguided because theyre only going to delay the arrival of utopia.

Some even contend that any deceleration of AI will cost lives. Deaths that were preventable by the AI that was prevented from existing is a form of murder. So, if you advocate for slowing down research on advanced AI, you are no better than a murderer.

The loudest voices within the AI doomer camp have been disproportionately responsible for launching and sustaining the very technological race that they now claim could doom humanity.

But theres a great irony to this whole bizarre predicament: historically speaking, no group has done more to accelerate the race to build AGI than the AI doomers. The very people screaming that the AGI race is a runaway train barreling toward the cliff of extinction have played an integral role in starting these AI companies. Some have helped found these companies, while others provided crucial early funding that enabled such companies to get going. They wrote papers, books and blog posts that popularized the idea of AGI and organized conferences that inspired interest in the topic. Many of those worried that AGI will kill everyone on Earth have gone on to work for the leading AI companies, and indeed the two techno-cultural movements that initially developed and promoted the doomer narrative namely, Rationalism and Effective Altruism have been at the very heart of the AGI race since its inception.

In a phrase, the loudest voices within the AI doomer camp have been disproportionately responsible for launching and sustaining the very technological race that they now claim could doom humanity in the coming years. Despite their apocalyptic warnings of near-term annihilation, the doomers have in practice been more effective at accelerating AGI than the accelerationists themselves.

Consider a few examples, beginning with the Skype cofounder and almost-billionaire Jaan Tallinn, who also happens to be one of the biggest financial backers of the Rationalist and Effective Altruist (EA) movements. Tallinn has repeatedly claimed that AGI poses an enormous threat to the survival of humanity. Or, in his words, it is by far the biggest risk facing us this century bigger than nuclear war, global pandemics or climate change.

In 2014, Tallinn co-founded a Boston-based organization called the Future of Life Institute (FLI), which has helped raise public awareness of the supposedly grave dangers of AGI. Last year, FLI released an open letter calling on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4, where GPT4 was the most advanced system that OpenAI had released at the time. The letter warns that AI labs have become locked in an out-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful digital minds that no one not even their creators can understand, predict, or reliably control, resulting in a dangerous race. Tallinn was one of the first signatories.

Tallinn is thus deeply concerned about the race to build AGI. Hes worried that this race might lead to our extinction in the near future. Yet, through his wallet, he has played a crucial role in sparking and fueling the AGI race. He was an early investor in DeepMind, which Demis Hassabis, Shane Legg and Mustafa Suleyman cofounded 2010 with the explicit goal of creating AGI. After OpenAI started in 2015, he had a close connection to some people at the company, meeting regularly with individuals like Dario Amodei, a member of the EA movement and a key figure in the direction of OpenAI. (Tallinn himself is closely aligned with the EA movement.)

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes.

In 2021, Amodei and six other former employees of OpenAI founded Anthropic, a competitor of both DeepMind and OpenAI. Where did Anthropic get its money? In part from Tallinn, who donated $25 million and led a $124 million series A fundraising round to help the company get started.

Here we have one of the leading voices in the doomer camp claiming that the AGI race could result in everyone on Earth dying, while simultaneously funding the biggest culprits in this reckless race toward AGI. Im reminded of something that Noam Chomsky once said in 2002, during the early years of George Bushs misguided War on Terror. Chomsky declared: We certainly want to reduce the level of terror, he said, referring to the U.S. There is one easy way to do that stop participating in it. The same idea applies to the AGI race: if AI doomers are really so worried that the race to build AGI will lead to an existential catastrophe, then why are they participating in it? Why have they funded and, in some cases, founded the very companies responsible for supposedly pushing humanity toward the precipice of total destruction?

In fact, Amodei, Shane Legg, Sam Altman and Elon Musk all of whom founded or cofounded some of the leading AI companies have expressed doomer concerns that AGI could annihilate our species in the near term. In an interview with the EA organization 80,000 Hours, Amodei referenced the possibility that an AGI could destroy humanity, saying I cant see any reason in principle why that couldnt happen. He adds that this is a possible outcome and at the very least as a tail risk we should take it seriously.

Over and over again, the very same people saying that AGI could kill us all have done more than anyone else to launch and accelerate the race toward AGI.

Similarly, DeepMind cofounder Shane Legg wrote on the website LessWrong in 2011 that AGI is his number 1 risk for this century. That was one year after DeepMind was created. In 2015, the year he co-founded OpenAI with Elon Musk and others, Altman declared that I think AI will most likely sort of lead to the end of the world, adding on his personal blog that the development of superhuman machine intelligence is probably the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity.

Then theres Musk, who has consistently identified AGI as the biggest existential threat, and far more dangerous than nukes. In early 2023, Musk signed the open letter from FLI calling for a six month pause on advanced AI research. Just four months later, he announced that he was starting yet another AI company: xAI.

Over and over again, the very same people saying that AGI could kill us all have done more than anyone else to launch and accelerate the race toward AGI. This is even true of the most famous doomer in the world today, a self-described genius named Eliezer Yudkowsky. In a Time magazine article from last year, Yudkowsky argued that our only hope of survival is to immediately shut down all of the large computer farms where the most powerful AIs are refined. Countries should sign an international treaty to halt AGI research and be willing to engage in military airstrikes against rogue datacenters to enforce this treaty.

Yudkowsky is so worried about the AGI apocalypse that he claims we should be willing to risk an all-out thermonuclear war that kills nearly everyone on Earth to prevent AGI from being built in the near future. He then gave a TED talk in which he reiterated his warnings: if we build AGI without knowing how to make it safe and we have no idea how to make it safe right now, he claims then literally everyone on Earth will die.

Yet I doubt that any single individual has promoted the idea of AGI more than Yudkowsky himself. In a very significant way, he put AGI on the map, inspired many people involved in the current AGI race to become interested in the topic, and organized conferences that brought together early AGI researchers to cross-pollinate ideas.

Consider the Singularity Summit, which Yudkowsky co-founded with the Google engineer Ray Kurzweil and tech billionaire Peter Thiel in 2006. This summit, held annually until 2012, focused on the promises and perils of AGI, and included the likes of Tallinn, Hassabis, and Legg on its list of speakers. In fact, both Hassabis and Legg gave talks about AGI-related issues in 2010, shortly before co-founding DeepMind. At the time, DeepMind needed money to get started, so after the Singularity Summit, Hassabis followed Thiel back to his mansion, where Hassabis asked Thiel for financial support to start DeepMind. Thiel obliged, offering Hassabis $1.85 million, and thats how DeepMind was born. (The following year, in 2011, is when Tallinn made his early investment in the company.)

If not for Yudkowskys Singularity Summit, DeepMind might not have gotten off the ground or at least not when it did. Similar points could be made about various websites and mailing lists that Yudkowsky created to promote the idea of AGI. For example, AGI has been a major focus of the community blogging website LessWrong, created by Yudkowsky around 2009. This website quickly became the online epicenter for discussions about how to build AGI, the utopian future that a safe or aligned AGI could bring about, and the supposed existential risks associated with AGIs that are unsafe or misaligned. As noted above, it was on the LessWrong website that Legg identified AGI to be the number one threat facing humanity, and records show that Legg was active on the website very early on, sometimes commenting directly under articles by Yudkowsky about AGI and related issues.

Or consider the SL4 mailing list that Yudkowsky created in 2001, which described itself as dedicated to advanced topics in transhumanism and the Singularity, including strategies to accelerate the Singularity. The Singularity is a hypothetical future event in which advanced AI begins to redesign itself, leading to a superintelligent AGI system over the course of weeks, days, or perhaps even minutes. Once again, Legg also contributed to the list, which indicates that the connections between Yudkowsky, the worlds leading doomer, and Legg, cofounder of one of the biggest AI companies involved in the AGI race, goes back more than two decades.

These are just a few reasons that Altman himself wrote on Twitter (now X) last year that Yudkowsky the worlds leading AI doomer has probably contributed more than anyone to the AGI race. In Altmans words, Yudkowsky got many of us interested in AGI, helped DeepMind get funding at a time when AGI was extremely outside the Overton window, was critical in the decision to start OpenAI, etc. He then joked that Yudkowsky may deserve the Nobel Peace Prize for this. (These quotes have been lightly edited to improve readability.)

Rationalists and EAs are also some of the main participants and contributors to the very race they believe could precipitate our doom.

Though Altman was partly trolling Yudkowsky for complaining about a situation the AGI race that Yudkowsky was instrumental in creating, Altman isnt wrong. As a New York Times article from 2023 notes, Mr. Yudkowsky and his writings played key roles in the creation of both OpenAI and DeepMind. One could say something similar about Anthropic, as it was Yudkowskys blog posts that convinced Tallinn that AGI could be existentially risky, and Tallinn later played a crucial role in helping Anthropic get started which further accelerated the race to build AGI. The connections and overlaps between the doomer movement and the race to build AGI are extensive and deep the more one scratches the surface, the clearer these links appear.

Indeed, I mentioned the Rationalist and EA movements earlier. Rationalism was founded by Yudkowsky via the LessWrong website, while EA emerged around the same time, in 2009, and could be seen as the sibling of Rationalism. These communities overlap considerably, and both have heavily promoted the idea that AGI poses a profound threat to our continued existence this century.

Yet Rationalists and EAs are also some of the main participants and contributors to the very race they believe could precipitate our doom. As noted above, Dario Amodei (co-founder of Anthropic) is an EA, and Tallinn has given talks at major EA conferences and donated tens of millions of dollars to both movements. Similarly, an Intelligencer article about Altman reports that Altman once embraced EA, and a New York Times profile describes him as the product of a strange, sprawling online community that began to worry, around the same time Mr. Altman came to the Valley, that artificial intelligence would one day destroy the world. Called rationalists or effective altruists, members ofthis movementwere instrumental in the creation of OpenAI.

Yet another New York Times article notes that the EA movement beat the drum so loudly about the dangers of AGI that many young people became inspired to work on the topic. Consequently, all of the major AI labs and safety research organizations contain some trace of effective altruisms influence, and many count believers among their staff members. The article then observes that no major AI lab embodies the EA ethos as fully as Anthropic, given that many of the companys early hires were effective altruists, and much of its start-up funding came from wealthy EA-affiliated tech executives not just Tallinn, but the co-founder of Facebook Dustin Moskovitz, who, like Tallinn, has donated considerably to EA projects.

There is a great deal to say about this topic, but the key point for our purposes is that the doomer narrative largely emerged out of the Rationalist and EA movements the very movements that have been pivotal in founding, funding and inspiring all the major AI companies now driving the race to build AGI.

Again, one wants to echo Chomsky in saying: if these communities are so worried about the AGI apocalypse, why have they done so much to create the very conditions that enabled the AGI race to get going? The doomers have probably done more to accelerate AGI research than the AI accelerationists that they characterize as recklessly dangerous.

How has this happened? And why? One reason is that many doomers believe that AGI will be built by someone, somewhere, eventually. So it might as well be them who builds the first AGI. After all, many Rationalists and EAs pride themselves on having exceptionally high IQs while claiming to be more rational than ordinary people, or normies. Hence, they are the best group to build AGI while ensuring that it is maximally safe and beneficial. The unfortunate consequence is that these Rationalists and EAs have inadvertently initiated a race to build AGI that, at this point, has gained so much momentum that it appears impossible to stop.

Even worse, some of the doomers most responsible for the AGI race are now using this situation to gain even more power by arguing that policymakers should look to them for the solutions. Tallinn, for example, recently joined the United Nations Artificial Intelligence Advisory Body, which focuses on the risks and opportunities of advanced AI, while Yudkowsky has defended an international policy that leaves the door open to military strikes that might trigger a thermonuclear war. These people helped create a huge, complicated mess, then turned around, pointed at that mess, and shouted: Oh, my! Were in such a dire situation! If only governments and politicians would listen to us, though, we just might be able to dodge the bullet of annihilation.

This looks like a farce. Its like someone drilling a hole in a boat and then declaring: The only way to avoid drowning is to make me captain.

The lesson is that governments and politicians should not be listening to the very people or the Rationalist and EA movements to which they belong that are disproportionately responsible for this mess in the first place. One could even argue plausibly, in my view that if not for the doomers, there probably wouldnt be an AGI race right now at all.

Though the race to build AGI does pose many dangers, the greatest underlying danger is the Rationalist and EA movements that spawned this unfortunate situation over the past decade and a half. If we really want to bring the madness of the AGI race to a stop, its time to let someone else have the mic.

Read more

about artificial intelligence

See the original post:

AI doomers have warned of the tech-pocalypse while doing their best to accelerate it - Salon

BY THE TIME children born today are in kindergarten, artificial intelligence (AI) will probably have surpassed humans at all cognitive tasks, from science to creativity. When I first predicted in 1999 that we would have such artificial general intelligence (AGI) by 2029, most experts thought Id switched to writing fiction. But since the spectacular breakthroughs of the past few years, many experts think we will have AGI even soonerso Ive technically gone from being an optimist to a pessimist, without changing my prediction at all.

After working in the field for 61 yearslonger than anyone else aliveI am gratified to see AI at the heart of global conversation. Yet most commentary misses how large language models like ChatGPT and Gemini fit into an even larger story. AI is about to make the leap from revolutionising just the digital world to transforming the physical world as well. This will bring countless benefits, but three areas have especially profound implications: energy, manufacturing and medicine.

See the original post:

Ray Kurzweil on how AI will transform the physical world - The Economist

Were sure youll agree that 2024 is turning out to be anything butbeige(bland or unremarkable; uninspiring). Were set to see a record-breaking number of elections this year, with 50 countries due to head to the polls before the year is out. Readers with an interest in UK and/or European politics might remember that we addedBrexitto theOEDback in 2016. Since then, several related words have proven their longevity, and this month, weve added entries forleaver,Brexiter, andBrexiteer(referring to people who supported, campaigned, or voted for the United Kingdoms withdrawal from the European Union), as well asremainerandRemoaner(words referring to those who did the same on the other side, wanting the UK to stay in the EU).

If you find yourselfbefuddled(bewildered, confused) by current political debates, take refuge in theenjoyability(the fact or quality of being enjoyable; congeniality, pleasurableness) of the following lighter offering. Have you found the third series of Netflixs glamorousBridgertonbinge-worthy? Taken note of thehunkiness(qualities or characteristics considered to be hunky, especially rugged good looks or sexual attractiveness) of its male stars? Then it may interest you to know that it was not until the early 1900s that the wordglamourcame to be associated with attractiveness and luxury. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, glamour was all about enchantment to cast aglamour over someone meant putting them quite literally under your spell.

The word only became closely associated with visual opulence, physical attraction, and charisma in the later twentieth century, perhaps as a result of the rise of cinema and the Golden Age of Hollywood. In the 1970s, the advent ofglam rock the style of rock music where performers such as David Bowie made flamboyant clothes and make-up a feature of their onstage performances and personas sealed this linguistic shift. Other associated additions includeglam rocker,visual kei(the glam rock movement or aesthetic in Japanese rock music),glam up(to make oneself more glamorous),glamour puss(a glamorous or attractive person),glamazon(a tall, glamorous, and powerful woman), andglampsite the most luxurious location to get your fix of the great outdoors.

Speaking of the great outdoors,wildscapenow has its own entry. Meaning an area within which plants and animals have been able to thrive with minimal or no human presence, it conjures up more peaceful scenes than some of our other environment-related additions.Five-alarm(designating a particularly large, fierce, destructive fire, especially one requiring a large-scale response from firefighters) andmegadrought(a drought lasting many years, great both in extent and severity) echo other alarming language used in the world of meteorology, such asweather bomb(added in 2015) andblood rain(added in 2012).

Moving back indoors and online, weve added a number of technology related terms, perhaps most notablyartificial general intelligence, orAGIfor short. This is a form of AI in which a machine or computer program can (hypothetically) simulate behaviour as intelligent as, or more intelligent than, that of a human being. When it comes to human activity on the internet, weve addedfreecycle(to give away an unwanted possession, especially when agreed or arranged via an online network) andedgelord(a person who affects a provocative or extreme persona, especially online).Snackable, meanwhile, can be used to describe a video or other item of digital content, especially on social media, that is designed for brief and easy consumption, or to refer to food intended as a snackIRL(in real life which is not a new addition, but is an enjoyable acronym).

Speaking of snacks, babyccino(a frothy hot milk drink for children, intended to resemble a cappuccino) and the regrettableshrinkflation(a reduction in the size or weight of products with no corresponding reduction in price, a phenomenon first described this way in 2008) can now be found in theOED. Fewer tasty treats for more money? How regrettable. One last food-related anecdote before we sign off the verbbeefhas a new first sense. Evidence dating from the early 1800s shows the phraseto cry beefhad the meaning to raise the alarm or make an outcry against a person, especially to cry for help to arrest an escaping thief. This seems to be a precursor to the more familiar current senses ofbeef(and indeedbeefing) relating to arguments, fights, and feuds.

Sadly, we cantsqueeze another word in edgeways(to contribute something to a conversation, usually with the implication that this is difficult because the other speakers are talking incessantly).T minusthree months until the next quarterly update Join us then.

Learn More

For more insight into the surprising joint linguistic origins of the words glamourandgrammar, seethis blog post. Thesenew word notesinclude discussion of the wordcoruscating(recommended reading), and this piece focuses on updates aroundIndo-European words. A selection of highlights from the list ofnew wordsadded,new sensesadded, and additions tounrevised entriesare available too.

View original post here:

Artificial General Intelligence, Shrinkflation and Snackable are Some of the Many New, Revised, or Updated Words and ... - LJ INFOdocket

It's time to celebrate the incredible women leading the way in AI! Nominate your inspiring leaders for VentureBeats Women in AI Awards today before June 18. Learn More

Ever since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, the ubiquity of words like inference, reasoning and training-data is indicative of how much AI has taken over our consciousness. These words, previously only heard in the halls of computer science labs or in big tech company conference rooms, are now overhead at bars and on the subway.

There has been a lot written (and even more that will be written) on how to make AI agents and copilots better decision makers. Yet we sometimes forget that, at least in the near term, AI will augment human decision-making rather than fully replace it. A nice example is the enterprise data corner of the AI world with players (as of the time of this articles publication) ranging from ChatGPT to Glean to Perplexity. Its not hard to conjure up a scenario of a product marketing manager asking her text-to-SQL AI tool, What customer segments have given us the lowest NPS rating?, getting the answer she needs, maybe asking a few follow-up questions and what if you segment it by geo?, then using that insight to tailor her promotions strategy planning.

This is AI augmenting the human.

Looking even further out, there likely will come a world where a CEO can say: Design a promotions strategy for me given the existing data, industry-wide best practices on the matter and what we learned from the last launch, and the AI will produce one comparable to a good human product marketing manager. There may even come a world where the AI is self-directed and decides that a promotions strategy would be a good idea and starts to work on it autonomously to share with the CEO that is, act as an autonomous CMO.

VB Transform 2024 Registration is Open

Join enterprise leaders in San Francisco from July 9 to 11 for our flagship AI event. Connect with peers, explore the opportunities and challenges of Generative AI, and learn how to integrate AI applications into your industry. Register Now

Overall, its safe to say that until artificial general intelligence (AGI) is here, humans will likely be in the loop when it comes to making decisions of significance. While everyone is opining on what AI will change about our professional lives, I wanted to return to what it wont change (anytime soon): Good human decision making. Imagine your business intelligence team and its bevy of AI agents putting together a piece of analysis for you on a new promotions strategy. How do you leverage that data to make the best possible decision? Here are a few time (and lab) tested ideas that I live by:

Before seeing the data:

While looking at the data:

While making the decision:

At this point, if youre thinking, this sounds like a lot of extra work, you will find that this approach very quickly becomes second nature to your executive team and any additional time it incurs is high ROI: Ensuring all the expertise at your organization is expressed, and setting guardrails so the decision downside is limited and that you learn from it whether it goes well or poorly.

As long as there are humans in the loop, working with data and analyses generated by human and AI agents will remain a critically valuable skill set in particular, navigating the minefields of cognitive biases while working with data.

Sid Rajgarhia is on the investment team at First Round Capital and has spent the last decade working on data-driven decision making at software companies.

DataDecisionMakers

Welcome to the VentureBeat community!

DataDecisionMakers is where experts, including the technical people doing data work, can share data-related insights and innovation.

If you want to read about cutting-edge ideas and up-to-date information, best practices, and the future of data and data tech, join us at DataDecisionMakers.

You might even considercontributing an articleof your own!

Read More From DataDecisionMakers

Visit link:

AGI isnt here (yet): How to make informed, strategic decisions in the meantime - VentureBeat