The AI Profit and Cost Race: Drivers, Get Your Checkbooks Out
January 15, 2025
A dinobaby-crafted post. I confess. I used smart software to create the heart wrenching scene of a farmer facing a tough 2025.
Microsoft appears ready to spend $80 billion “on AI-enabled data centers” by December 31, 2025. Half of the money will go to US facilities, and the other half, other nation states. I learned this information from a US cable news outfit’s article “Microsoft Expects to Spend $80 Billion on AI-Enabled Data Centers in Fiscal 2025.” Is Microsoft tossing out numbers as part of a marketing plan to trigger the lustrous Google, or is Microsoft making clear that it is going whole hog for smart software despite the worries of investors that an AI revenue drought persists? My thought is that Microsoft likes to destabilize the McKinsey-type thinking at Google, wait for the online advertising giant to deliver another fabulous Sundar & Prabhakar Comedy Tour, and then continue plodding forward.
The write up reports:
Several top-tier technology companies are rushing to spend billions on Nvidia graphics processing units for training and running AI models. The fast spread of OpenAI’s ChatGPT assistant, which launched in late 2022, kicked off the AI race for companies to deliver their own generative AI capabilities. Having invested more than $13 billion in OpenAI, Microsoft provides cloud infrastructure to the startup and has incorporated its models into Windows, Teams and other products.
Yep, Google-centric marketing.
Thanks, You.com. Good enough.
But if Microsoft does spend $80 billion, how will the company convert those costs into a profit geyser? That’s a good question. Microsoft appears to be cooperating with discounts for its mainstream consumer software. I saw advertisements offering Windows 11 Professional for $25. Other deep discounts can be found for Office 365, Visio, and even the bread-and-butter sales pitch PowerPoint application.
Tweaking Google is one thing. Dealing with cost competition is another.
I noted that the South China Morning Post’s article “Alibaba Ties Up with Lee Kai-fu’s Unicorn As China’s AI Sector Consolidates.” Tucked into that rah rah write up was this statement:
The cooperation between two of China’s top AI players comes as price wars continue in the domestic market, forcing companies to further slash prices or seek partnerships with former foes. Alibaba Cloud said on Tuesday it would reduce the fees for using its visual reasoning AI model by up to 85 per cent, the third time it had marked down the prices of its AI services in the past year. That came after TikTok parent ByteDance last month cut the price of its visual model to 0.003 yuan (US$0.0004) per thousand token uses, about 85 per cent lower than the industry average.
The message is clear. The same tactic that China’s electric vehicle manufacturers are using will be applied to smart software. The idea is that people will buy good enough products and services if the price is attractive. Bean counters intuitively know that a competitor that reduces prices and delivers an acceptable product can gain market share. The companies unable to compete on price face rising costs and may be forced to cut their prices, thus risking financial collapse.
For a multi-national company, the cost of Chinese smart software may be sufficiently good to attract business. Some companies which operate under US sanctions and controls of one type or another may be faced with losing some significant markets. Examples include Brazil, India, Middle Eastern nations, and others. That means that a price war can poke holes in the financial predictions which outfits like Microsoft are basing some business decisions.
What’s interesting is that this smart software tactic apparently operating in China fits in with other efforts to undermine some US methods of dominating the world’s financial system. I have no illusions about the maturity of the AI software. I am, however, realistic about the impact of spending significant sums with the fervent belief that a golden goose will land on the front lawn of Microsoft’s headquarters. I am okay with talking about AI in order to wind up Google. I am a bit skeptical about hosing $80 billion into data centers. These puppies gobble up power, which is going to get expensive quickly if demand continues to blast past the power generation industry’s projections. An economic downturn in 2025 will not help ameliorate the situation. Toss in regional wars and social turmoil and what does one get?
Risk. Welcome to 2025.
Stephen E Arnold, January 15, 2025
AI Search Engine from Alibaba Grows Apace
January 15, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
The Deepseek red herring has been dragged across the path of US AI innovators. A flurry of technology services wrote about Deepseek’s ability to give US smart software companies a bit of an open source challenge. The hook, however, was not just the efficacy of the approach. The killer message was, “Better, faster, and cheaper.” Yep, cheaper, the concept which raises questions about certain US outfits burning cash in units of a one billion dollars with every clock tick.
A number of friendly and lovable deer are eating the plants in Uncle Sam’s garden. How many of these are living in the woods looking for a market to consume? Thanks OpenAI, good enough.
Now Alibaba is coming for AI search. The Chinese company crows on PR Newswire, "Alibaba’s Accio AI Search Engine Hits 500,000 SME User Milestone." Sounds like a great solution for US businesses doing work for the government. The press release reveals:
"Alibaba International proudly announces that its artificial intelligence (AI)-powered business-to-business (B2B) search engine for product sourcing, Accio, has reached a significant milestone since its launch in November 2024, currently boasting over 500,000 small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) users. … During the peak global e-commerce sales seasons in November and December, more than 50,000 SMEs worldwide have actively used Accio to source inspirations for Black Friday and Christmas inventory stocking. User feedback shows that the search engine helped them achieve this efficiently. Accio now holds a net promoter score (NPS) exceeding 50[1], indicating a high level of customer satisfaction. On December 13, 2024, the dynamic search engine was also named ‘Product of the Day’ on Product Hunt, a site that curates new products in tech, further cementing its status as an indispensable tool for SME buyers worldwide."
Well, good for them. And, presumably, for China ‘s information gathering program. Founded in 1999, Alibaba Group is based in Hangzhou, Zhejiang. One can ask many questions about Alibaba, including ones related to the company’s interaction with Chinese government officials. When a couple of deer are eating one’s garden vegetables, a good question to ask is, “How many of these adorable creatures live in the woods?” One does not have to be Natty Bumpo to know that the answer is, “There are more where those came from.”
Cynthia Murrell, January 15, 2025
Agentic Workflows and the Dust Up Between Microsoft and Salesforce
January 14, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
The Register, a UK online publication, does a good job of presenting newsworthy events with a touch of humor. Today I spotted a new type of information in the form of an explainer plus management analysis. Plus the lingo and organization suggest a human did all or most of the work required to crank out a very good article called “In AI Agent Push, Microsoft Re-Orgs to Create CoreAI – Platform and Tools Team.”
I want to highlight the explainer part of the article. The focus is on the notion of agentic; specifically:
agentic applications with memory, entitlements, and action space that will inherit powerful model capabilities. And we will adapt these capabilities for enhanced performance and safety across roles, business processes, and industry domains. Further, how we build, deploy, and maintain code for these AI applications is also fundamentally changing and becoming agentic.
These words are attributed to Microsoft’s top dog Satya Nadella, but they sound as if one of the highly paid wordsmiths laboring for the capable Softies. Nevertheless, the idea is important. In order to achieve the agentic pinnacle, Microsoft has to reorganize. Whoever can figure out how to make agentic applications work across different vendors’ solutions will be able to make money. That’s the basic idea: Smart software is going to create a new big thing for enterprise software and probably some consumers.
The write up explains:
It’s arguably just plain old software talking to plain old software, which would be nothing new. The new angle here, though, is that it’s driven mainly by, shall we say, imaginative neural networks and models making decisions, rather than algorithms following entirely deterministic routes. Which is still software working with software. Nadella thinks building artificially intelligent agentic apps and workflows needs “a new AI-first app stack — one with new UI/UX patterns, runtimes to build with agents, orchestrate multiple agents, and a reimagined management and observability layer.”
To win the land in this new territory, Microsoft must have a Core AI team. Google and Salesforce presumably have this type of set up. Microsoft has to step up its AI efforts. The Register points out:
Nadella noted that “our internal organizational boundaries are meaningless to both our customers and to our competitors”. That’s an odd observation given Microsoft published his letter, which concludes with this observation: “Our success in this next phase will be determined by having the best AI platform, tools, and infrastructure. We have a lot of work to do and a tremendous opportunity ahead, and together, I’m looking forward to building what comes next.”
Here’s what I found interesting:
- Agentic is the next big thing in smart software. Essentially smart software that does one thing is useful. Orchestrating agents to do a complex process is the future. The software decides. Everything works well — at least, that’s the assumption.
- Microsoft, like Google, is now in a Code Yellow or Code Red mode. The company feels the heat from Salesforce. My hunch is that Microsoft knows that add ins like Ghostwriter for Microsoft Office is more useful than Microsoft’s own Copilot for many users. If the same boiled fish appears on the enterprise menu, Microsoft is in a world of hurt from Salesforce and probably a lot of other outfits.
- The re-org parallels the disorder that surfaced at Google when it fixed up its smart software operation or tried to deal with the clash of the wizards in that estimable company. Pushing boxes around on an organization chart is honorable work, but that management method may not deliver the agentic integration some people want.
The conclusion I drew from The Register’s article is that the big AI push and the big players’ need to pop up a conceptual level in smart software is perceived as urgent. Costs? No problem. Hallucination? No problem. Hardware availability? No problem. Software? No problem. A re-organization is obvious and easy. No problem.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 2025
More about NAMER, the Bitext Smart Entity Technology
January 14, 2025
A dinobaby product! We used some smart software to fix up the grammar. The system mostly worked. Surprised? We were.
We spotted more information about the Madrid, Spain based Bitext technology firm. The company posted “Integrating Bitext NAMER with LLMs” in late December 2024. At about the same time, government authorities arrested a person known as “Broken Tooth.” In 2021, an alert for this individual was posted. His “real” name is Wan Kuok-koi, and he has been in an out of trouble for a number of years. He is alleged to be part of a criminal organization and active in a number of illegal behaviors; for example, money laundering and human trafficking. The online service Irrawady reported that Broken Tooth is “the face of Chinese investment in Myanmar.”
Broken Tooth (né Wan Kuok-koi, born in Macau) is one example of the importance of identifying entity names and relating them to individuals and the organizations with which they are affiliated. A failure to identify entities correctly can mean the difference between resolving an alleged criminal activity and a get-out-of-jail-free card. This is the specific problem that Bitext’s NAMER system addresses. Bitext says that large language models are designed for for text generation, not entity classification. Furthermore, LLMs pose some cost and computational demands which can pose problems to some organizations working within tight budget constraints. Plus, processing certain data in a cloud increases privacy and security risks.
Bitext’s solution provides an alternative way to achieve fine-grained entity identification, extraction, and tagging. Bitext’s solution combines classical natural language processing solutions solutions with large language models. Classical NLP tools, often deployable locally, complement LLMs to enhance NER performance.
NAMER excels at:
- Identifying generic names and classifying them as people, places, or organizations.
- Resolving aliases and pseudonyms.
- Differentiating similar names tied to unrelated entities.
Bitext supports over 20 languages, with additional options available on request. How does the hybrid approach function? There are two effective integration methods for Bitext NAMER with LLMs like GPT or Llama are. The first is pre-processing input. This means that entities are annotated before passing the text to the LLM, ideal for connecting entities to knowledge graphs in large systems. The second is to configure the LLM to call NAMER dynamically.
The output of the Bitext system can generate tagged entity lists and metadata for content libraries or dictionary applications. The NAMER output can integrate directly into existing controlled vocabularies, indexes, or knowledge graphs. Also, NAMER makes it possible to maintain separate files of entities for on-demand access by analysts, investigators, or other text analytics software.
By grouping name variants, Bitext NAMER streamlines search queries, enhancing document retrieval and linking entities to knowledge graphs. This creates a tailored “semantic layer” that enriches organizational systems with precision and efficiency.
For more information about the unique NAMER system, contact Bitext via the firm’s Web site at www.bitext.com.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 2025
Apple and Some Withering Fruit: Is the Orchard on Fire?
January 14, 2025
A dinobaby-crafted post. I confess. I used smart software to create the heart wrenching scene of a farmer facing a tough 2025.
Apple is a technology giant, a star in the universe of bytes. At the starter’s gun for 2025, Apple may have some work to do. For example, I read “Apple’s China Troubles Mount as Foreign Phone Sales Sink for 4th Month.” (For now, this is a trust outfit story, but a few months down the road the information may originate from the “real” news powerhouse Gannet. Imagine that.) The “trusted” outfit Reuters stated:
Apple, the dominant foreign smartphone maker in China, faces a slowing economy and competition from domestic rivals, such as Huawei…. Apple briefly fell out of China’s top five smartphone vendors in the second quarter of 2024 before recovering in the third quarter. The U.S. company’s smartphone sales in China still slipped 0.3% during the third quarter from a year earlier, while Huawei’s sales rose 42%, according to research firm IDC.
I think this means that Apple is losing share in what may have been a very juicy market. Can it get this fertile revenue field producing in-demand Fuji Apples to market? With a new US administration coming down the information highway, it is possible that the iPhone’s pop up fruit stand could be blown off the side of the main road.
An apple farmer grasps the problem fruit blight poses. Thanks, You.com you produced okay fruit blight when ChatGPT told me that an orchard with fruit blight was against is guidelines. Helpful, right?
Another issue Apple faces in a different orchard regards privacy. “Apple to Pay $95 Million to Settle Siri Privacy Lawsuit” reports:
Apple agreed to pay $95 million in cash to settle a proposed class action lawsuit claiming that its voice-activated Siri assistant violated users’ privacy…. Mobile device owners complained that Apple routinely recorded their private conversations after they activated Siri unintentionally, and disclosed these conversations to third parties such as advertisers.
Yeah, what about those privacy protections? What about those endless “Log in to your Facetime” when our devices don’t use Facetime. Hey, that is just Apple being so darned concerned about privacy. Will Apple pay or will it appeal? I won’t trouble you with my answer. Legal eagles love these fertile fields.
I don’t want to overlook the Apple AI. Yahoo recycled a story from Digital Intelligence called “The Good and Bad of Apple Intelligence after Using It on My iPhone for Months.” The Yahoo version of the story said:
I was excited to check out more Apple Intelligence features when I got the iOS 18.2 update on my iPhone 16 Pro. But aside from what I’ve already mentioned, the rest isn’t as exciting. I already hate AI art in general, so I wasn’t too thrilled about Image Playground. However, since it’s a new feature, I had to try it at least once. I tried to get Apple Intelligence to generate an AI image of me, in various scenarios, to perhaps share on social media. But every result I got did not look good to me, and I felt it had no actual resemblance to my image. It kept giving me odd-looking teeth in my smiles, hair that looked nothing like what I had, and other imperfections. I wasn’t expecting a perfect picture, but I was hoping I would get something that would be decent enough to share online — dozens of tries, and I wasn’t happy with any of them. I suppose my appearance doesn’t work with Apple’s AI art style? Whatever the reason is, my experience with it hasn’t been positive.
Yep, bad teeth. Perhaps the person has eaten too many apples?
Looking at these three allegedly accurate news stories what do I hypothesize about Apple in 2025:
- Apple will become increasingly desperate to generate revenue. Let’s face it the multi-thousand dollar Vision Pro headset and virtual Apple TV may fill the Chinese iPhone sales hole.
- Apple simply does what it wants to do with regard to privacy. From automatic iPhone reboots to smarmy talk about accidentally sucking down user data, the company cannot be trusted in 2025 in my opinion.
- Apple’s innovation is stalled. One of my colleagues told me Apple rolled out two dozen “new” products in 2025. I must confess that I cannot name one of them. The fruitarian seemed to be able to get my attention with “one more thing.” Today’s Apple has some discoloration.
Net net: The orchard needs a more skilled agrarian, fertilizer, and some luck with the business climate. Failing that, another bad crop may be ahead.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 2025
Some AI Wisdom: Is There a T Shirt?
January 14, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
I was catching up with newsfeeds and busy filtering the human output from the smart software spam-arator. I spotted “The Serious Science of Trolling LLMs,” published in the summer of 2024. The article explains that value can be derived from testing large language models like ChatGPT, Gemini, and others with prompts to force the software to generate something really stupid, off base, incorrect, or goofy. I zipped through the write up and found it interesting. Then I came upon this passage:
the LLM business is to some extent predicated on deception; we are not supposed to know where the magic ends and where cheap tricks begin. The vendors’ hope is that with time, we will reach full human-LLM parity; and until then, it’s OK to fudge it a bit. From this perspective, the viral examples that make it patently clear that the models don’t reason like humans are not just PR annoyances; they are a threat to product strategy.
Several observations:
- Progress from my point of view with smart software seems to have slowed. The reason may be that free and low cost services cannot affords to provide the functionality they did before someone figured out the cost per query. The bean counters spoke and “quality” went out the window.
- The gap between what the marketers say and what the systems do is getting wider. Sorry, AI wizards, the systems typically fail to produce an output satisfactory for my purposes on the first try. Multiple prompts are required. Again a cost cutting move in my opinion.
- Made up information or dead wrong information is becoming more evident. My hunch is that the consequence of ingesting content produced by AI is degrading the value of the models originally trained on human generated content. I think this is called garbage in — garbage out.
Net net: Which of the deep pocket people will be the first to step back from smart software built upon systems that consume billions of dollars the way my French bulldog eats doggie treats? The Chinese system Deepseek’s marketing essentially says, “Yo, we built this LLM at a fraction of the cost of the spendthrifts at Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI. Are the Chinese AI wizards dragging a red herring around the AI forest?
To go back to the Lcamtuf essay, “it’s OK to fudge a bit.” Nope, it is mandatory to fudge a lot.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 2025
Beating on Quantum: Thump, Clang
January 13, 2025
A dinobaby produced this post. Sorry. No smart software was able to help the 80 year old this time around.
The is it new or is it PR service Benzinga published on January 13, 2025, “Quantum Computing Stocks Tumble after Mark Zuckerberg Backs Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang’s Practical Comments.” I love the “practical.” Quantum computing is similar to the modular home nuclear reactor from my point of view. These are interesting topics to discuss, but when it comes to convincing a home owners’ association to allow the installation of a modular nuclear reactor or squeezing the gizmos required to make quantum computing sort of go in a relatively reliable way, un uh.
Is this a practical point of view? No. The reason is that most people have zero idea of what is required to get a quantum computer or a quantum anything to work. The room for the demonstration is usually a stage set. The cooling, the electronics, and the assorted support equipment is — how shall I phrase it — bulky. That generator outside the quantum lab is not for handling a power outage. The trailer-sized box is pumping volts into the quantum set up.
The write up explains:
comments made by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Nvidia Corp. CEO Jensen Huang, who both expressed caution regarding the timeline for quantum computing advancements.
Caution. Good word.
The remarks by Zuckerberg and Huang have intensified concerns about the future of quantum computing. Earlier, during Nvidia’s analyst day, Huang expressed optimism about quantum computing’s potential but cautioned that practical applications might take 15 to 30 years to materialize. This outlook has led to a sharp decline in quantum computing stocks. Despite the cautious projections, some industry insiders have countered Huang’s views, arguing that quantum-based innovations are already being integrated into the tech ecosystem. Retail investors have shown optimism, with several quantum computing stocks experiencing significant growth in recent weeks.
I know of a person who lectures about quantum. I have heard that the theme of these presentations is that quantum computing is just around the corner. Okay. Google is quantumly supreme. Intel has its super technology called Horse Ridge or Horse Features. IBM makes quantum squeaks.
I want research to continue, but it is interesting to me that two big technology wizards want to talk about practical quantum computing. One does the social media thing unencumbered by expensive content moderation and the other is pushing smart software enabling technology forward.
Neither wants the quantum hype to supersede the marketing of either of these wizards’ money machines. I love “real news”, particularly when it presents itself as practical. May I suggest you place your order for a D-Wave or an Enron egg nuclear reactor. Practical.
Stephen E Arnold, January 13, 2025
FOGINT: A Shocking Assertion about Israeli Intelligence Before the October 2023 Attack
January 13, 2025
A post from the FOGINT team.
One of my colleagues alerted me to a new story in the Jerusalem Post. The article is “IDF Could’ve Stopped Oct. 7 by Monitoring Hamas’s Telegram, Researchers Say.” The title makes clear that this is an “after action” analysis. Everyone knows that thinking about the whys and wherefores right of bang is a safe exercise. Nevertheless, let’s look at what the Jerusalem Post reported on January 5, 2025.
First, this statement:
“These [Telegram] channels were neither secret nor hidden — they were open and accessible to all.” — Lt.-Col. (res.) Jonathan Dahoah-Halevi
Telegram puts some “silent” barriers to prevent some third parties from downloading in real time active discussions. I know of one Israeli cyber security firm which asserts that it monitors Telegram public channel messages. (I won’t ask the question, “Why didn’t analysts at that firm raise an alarm or contact their former Israeli government employers with that information? Those are questions I will sidestep.)
Second, the article reports:
These channels [public Telegram channels like Military Tactics] were neither secret nor hidden — they were open and accessible to all. The “Military Tactics” Telegram channel even shared professional content showcasing the organization’s level of preparedness and operational capabilities. During the critical hours before the attack, beginning at 12:20 a.m. on October 7, the channel posted a series of detailed messages that should have raised red flags, including: “We say to the Zionist enemy, [the operation] coming your way has never been experienced by anyone,” “There are many, many, many surprises,” “We swear by Allah, we will humiliate you and utterly destroy you,” and “The pure rifles are loaded, and your heads are the target.”
Third, I circled this statement:
However, Dahoah-Halevi further asserted that the warning signs appeared much earlier. As early as September 17, a message from the Al-Qassam Brigades claimed, “Expect a major security event soon.” The following day, on September 18, a direct threat was issued to residents of the Gaza border communities, stating, “Before it’s too late, flee and leave […] nothing will help you except escape.”
The attack did occur, and it had terrible consequences for the young people killed and wounded and for the Israeli cyber security industry, which some believe is one of the best in the world. The attack suggested that marketing rather than effectiveness created an impression at odds with reality.
What are the lessons one can take from this report? The FOGINT team will leave that to you to answer.
Stephen E Arnold, January 13, 2025
Super Humans Share Super Thoughts about Free Speech
January 13, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
The Marvel comix have come to life. “Elon Musk Responds As Telegram CEO Makes Fun of Facebook Parent Meta Over Fact Checking” reports
Elon Musk responded to a comment from Telegram CEO Pavel Durov, who made a playful jab at Meta over its recent decision to end fact checking on Facebook and Instagram. Durov, posted about the shut down of Meta’s fact checking program on X (formerly known as Twitter) saying that Telegram’s commitment to freedom of speech does not depend on the US Electoral cycle.
The interaction among three modern Marvel heroes is interesting. Only Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and controlling force at Facebook (now Meta) is producing children with a spouse. Messrs. Musk and Durov are engaged in spawning children — presumably super comix characters — with multiple partners and operating as if each ruled a country. Mr. Musk has fathered a number of children. Mr. Durov allegedly has more than 100 children. The idea uniting these two larger-than-life characters is that they are super humans. Mr. Zuckerberg has a different approach, guided more by political expediency than a desire to churn out numerous baby Zucks.
Technology super heroes head toward a meeting of the United Nations to explain how the world will be working with their organizations. Thanks, Copilot. Good enough.
The article includes this statement from Mr. Durov:
I’m proud that Telegram has supported freedom of speech long before it became politically safe to dop so. Our values don’t depend on US electoral cycles, said Durov in a post shared on X.
This is quite a statement. Mr. Durov blocked messages from the Ukrainian government to Russian users of Telegram. After being snared in the French judicial system, Mr. Durov has demonstrated a desire to cooperate with law enforcement. Information about Telegram users has been provided to law enforcement. Mr. Durov is confined to France as his lawyers work to secure his release. Mr. Durov has been learning more about French procedures and bureaucracy since August 2024. The wheels of justice do turn in France, probably less rapidly than the super human Pavel Durov wishes.
After Mr. Durov shared his observation about the Zuck’s willingness to embrace free speech on Twitter (now x.com), the super hero Elon Musk chose to respond. Taking time from posts designed to roil the political waters in Britain, Mr. Musk offered an ironic “Good for you” as a comment about Mr. Durov’s quip about the Zuck.
The question is, “Do these larger-than-life characters with significant personal fortunes and influential social media soap boxes support free speech?” The answer is unclear. From my vantage point in rural Kentucky, I perceive public relations or marketing output from these three individuals. My take is that Mr. Durov talks about free speech as he appears to cooperate with French law enforcement and possibly a nation-state like Russia. Mr. Musk has been characterized by some in the US as “President Musk.” The handle reflects Mr. Musk’s apparent influence on some of the policies of the incoming administration. Mr. Zuckerberg has been quick to contribute money to a recently elected candidate and even faster on the draw when it comes to dumping much of the expensive overhead of fact checking social media content.
The Times of India article is more about the global ambitions of three company leaders. Free speech could be a convenient way to continue to generate business, retain influence over information framing, and reinforce their roles as the the 2025 incarnations of Spider-Man, Iron Man, and Hulk. After decades of inattention by regulators, the new super heroes may not be engaged in saving or preserving anything except their power and influence and cash flows.
Stephen E Arnold, January 13, 2025
AI Defined in an Arts and Crafts Setting No Less
January 13, 2025
Prepared by a still-alive dinobaby.
I was surprised to learn that a design online service (what I call arts and crafts) tackled a to most online publications skip. The article “What Does AI Really Mean?” tries to define AI or smart software. I remember a somewhat confused and erratic college professor trying to define happiness. Wow, that was a wild and crazy lecture. (I think the person’s name was Dr. Chapman. I tip my ball cap with the SS8 logo on it to him.) The author of this essay is a Googler, so it must be outstanding, furthering the notion of quantum supremacy at Google.
What is AI? The write up says:
I hope this helped you better understand what those terms mean and the processes which encompass the term “AI”.
Okay, “helped you understand better.” What does the essay do to help me understand better. Hang on to your SS8 ball cap. The author briefly defines these buzzwords:
- Data as coordinates
- Querying per approximation
- Language models both large and small
- Fine “Tunning” (Isn’t that supposed to be tuning?)
- Enhancing context with information, including grounded generation
- Embedding.
For me, a list of buzzwords is not a definition. (At least the hapless Dr. Chapman tried to provide concrete examples and references to his own experience with happiness, which as I recall eluded him.)
The “definition” jumps to a section called “Let’s build.” The author concludes the essay with:
I hope this helped you better understand what those terms mean and the processes which encompass the term “AI”. This merely scratches the surface of complexity, though. We still need to talk about AI Agents and how all these approaches intertwine to create richer experiences. Perhaps we can do that in a later article — let me know in the comments if you’d like that!
That’s it. The Google has, from his point of view, defined AI. As Holden Caufield in The Catcher in the Rye said:
“I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it.”
Bingo.
Stephen E Arnold, January 13, 2025
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
