Is AI Taking Over Human Jobs? Unveiling Reality with The Case Of Olivia Lipkin

The increasing use of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT has raised apprehensions regarding their ability to replace human employment. Nevertheless, these concerns were frequently disregarded as mere conjecture. Presently, a report published in the Washington Post substantiates that AI has begun to displace human workers indeed.

Despite its imperfections and the emergence of errors over time, companies hold the belief that generative AI is adequate for specific positions, especially in the realm of social media writing.

The article focuses on the story of Olivia Lipkin, a 25-year-old copywriter employed at a tech start-up in San Francisco. At first, Lipkin didn't pay much attention to ChatGPT when it was introduced in November. However, over the subsequent months, she noticed a shift in her workplace dynamics. Her managers began addressing her as Olivia/ChatGPT on Slack, which she found disrespectful. In April, Lipkin was unexpectedly terminated without any explanation. It later came to light that the company's managers had been discussing the cost-effectiveness of utilizing ChatGPT instead of hiring a writer, revealing the true motive behind Lipkin's dismissal.

As a strong advocate for generative AI, Microsoft has made significant investments in OpenAI to propel its progress in the field. The company has also introduced Bing Chat, a platform that integrates ChatGPT into its services. Microsoft's approach has focused on achieving a delicate equilibrium, highlighting the importance of AI as a supportive tool for human workers rather than a complete replacement.

One crucial aspect to consider in the story of Olivia Lipkin is the current economic climate, which has witnessed a rise in interest rates and a decline in consumer spending. As businesses strive to cut costs and focus on profitability, Lipkin's termination at a startup company may have been driven by tighter budgets rather than being solely attributed to the advancement of generative AI tools like ChatGPT. However, it is important to carefully examine the long-term consequences of the widespread implementation of AI in the workforce, particularly the potential challenges faced by individuals if they are permanently replaced by AI. The true impact of generative AI will become clearer once economic conditions stabilize, and it is crucial to strike a balance that ensures AI complements and augments human capabilities rather than rendering them obsolete.

In a nutshell, the worries regarding how generative AI affects employment have become evident through Olivia Lipkin's situation. Although companies may find AI tools financially advantageous in the short run, the potential long-term ramifications of widespread job displacement should be given thoughtful attention. As the global economy adapts to changing circumstances, a better understanding of the actual impact of generative AI will emerge. It is crucial to take measures that ensure AI technology serves as a complement to and as a support to human workers instead of rendering them unnecessary.

Read next: Risky AI Incidents See 690% Increase
by Unknown via Digital Information World

Only 40% of People Can Identify Bots from Humans

The rapid rate of advancement that is being seen in the world of AI has caused many to wonder if we will be able to tell the difference in the future. Large Language Models such as ChatGPT have already begun to adopt human mannerisms, and while it might seem easy to tell whether or not the entity at the other end is an AI or a human being, further innovation will certainly make this harder than might have been the case otherwise.

One of OpenAI’s biggest competitors, AI21 Labs, recently conducted a social experiment dubbed “Human or Not”, and it revealed that around 32% of the people that participated in this experiment were unable to distinguish between AI and real human beings. This is perhaps the biggest Turing Test that has been conducted so far, and its findings reveal the dire need for more effort to be put into marking AI for the purposes of allowing people to identify it.

Participants were asked to have two minute long conversations with an AI bot that leveraged LLMs sourced from both ChatGPT-4 as well as Jurassic 2 which hails from AI21 Labs. With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that participants were able to figure out if the person was a human being in 73% of instances.

In spite of the fact that this is the case, whenever there was a bot on the other end, the success rate dropped to 40%. This seems to suggest that 60% of respondents were unable to figure out that they were talking to a bot, something that does not bode well for the future of AI and how it can be used to manipulate others.

However, the researchers behind this social experiment were able to glean some useful insights pertaining to how users go about trying to figure out whether or not they are talking to a bot or a human. Most of these techniques are based on false assumptions, such as the notion that bots never use typos or grammatical errors.

Researchers were aware that these tactics might be deployed, so they specifically trained their bots to strategically utilize typos and other forms of errors in syntax and grammar to make them seem more human. Personal questions were also used fairly frequently, with participants trying to get the bots to talk about their backgrounds, assuming that bots would not be able to respond to such queries.

Once again, these bots were trained on datasets that included a wide range of personal stories, and that led to them being able to answer these questions in a way that is surprisingly similar to human beings. Hence, 32% of participants were unable to successfully identity AI during this experiment with all things having been considered and taken into account.

There is a high level of likelihood that this will factor into the upcoming US elections because of the fact that this is the sort of thing that could potentially end up leading to more misinformation being spread. It will be interesting to see how the US adapts its policy to respond to increasingly human-like AI and other types of bots.

Read next: Risky AI Incidents See 690% Increase
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

49% of Survey Respondents Are Worried About AI Security Risks

It seems like it will only be a matter of time until AI becomes commonplace in businesses around the world, but in spite of the fact that this is the case, business leaders appear to have some concerns. 72% of industry leaders that work at Fortune 500 companies say that generative AI will be an increasingly critical component of their corporate strategy moving forward, yet there are many who claim that there are undeniable risks that need to be addressed.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that 51% of people that responded to the same survey by The Harris Poll and Insight had some concerns about controlling the AI. 49% felt the same way about security, and 90% of survey respondents stated that the rise of AI will change the goals of their organizations.

However, 66% also mentioned how AI can assist them in optimizing customer service to the maximum possible level. 44% want to customize these experiences with the help of AI, and it will be interesting to see if any security issues arise as a consequence of this trend.

53% of corporate leaders say that AI will be critical for conducting research as well as for analyzing the various data points that they manage to accumulate. On the other end of the spectrum, 39% feel that AI might stifle genuine human creativity and innovation. 38% are worried about how the adoption of AI may lead to their budgets getting strained, and the complicated legal and regulatory frameworks are a prime concern for 35% as well.

There is clearly a lot of diversity of opinion when it comes to AI adoption. Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing 81% of business leaders have already formulated strategies wherein they plan to up their AI adoption as soon as they can. They are being forced to do so by market momentum, but it remains to be seen if the naysayers will end up being right or if the optimists have the correct impression for how things will go.

Read next: Even though many marketers are using AI as a staple in their work, many are still distrustful and have raised concerns
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

19% of Web Traffic is Malicious and 95% of Malicious Traffic Comes from Botnets According to New Study

There is a concerning number of malicious traffic on the internet, with an estimated 19% of all internet traffic being deemed malicious with all things having been considered and taken into account. It turns out that 95% of this harmful internet presence comes from botnets according to a report that was released by Trustwave.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that there are just a few botnets that are proving to be most successful. This is despite an overabundance of them online, which seems to suggest that there are a handful which are taking things to another level.

The main goal of botnets is to attempt to compromise the Internet of Things because of the fact that this is the sort of thing that could potentially end up giving them widespread access to numerous appliances. In order to protect themselves from the rising botnet tide, businesses must invest more heavily into security protocols that can render them safer than might have been the case otherwise.

The use of Botnets in DDoS attacks is quite pertinent, as is the manner in which they get used for cryptomining. Installing a cryptominer into an unwary or unsuspecting users system can lead to immense profits for threat actors, and the users system will suffer in terms of performance as well as efficiency. Indeed, consumers that have cryptojackers on their devices will suffer from untenable electricity bills, and they will not be able to use their systems in any feasible way either.

Mirai is perhaps the most consequential Botnet of all, with an estimated 500,000 devices in its network. Legal action has been taken against some users of Mirai, but in spite of the fact that this is the case, it appears that these efforts have mostly been rather unsuccessful. The failure to mitigate Mirai and other botnets like it reveals that this is not the sort of problem that will be going away anytime soon, and cybersecurity will remain spotty at best until swift action is taken.

Read next: The Role of Tech Corporations in Carbon Emissions
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

Risky AI Incidents See 690% Increase

As AI continues to become an ever more prominent aspect of the manner in which you have currently chosen to end up living your life, it has the potential to cause enormous harm as well. For all of the benefits that it can provide, so called AI incidents which refer to malfunctions, as well as intentional misuse from threat actors, have been dangerous enough to put the world on the brink of nuclear war.

This occurred back in 1983, when a rudimentary form of AI that was being used by the Soviet Union mistakenly detected an incoming nuclear attack from the USA. Not all incidents are quite this cataclysmic, although they can still cause more harm than might have been the case otherwise. The most recent example that we can think of is that of Tessa, the chatbot offered by the National Eating Disorders Institute, or NEDA for short.

This chatbot offered extremely dangerous advice to the people it was conversing with, which may have increased their eating disorders risks with all things having been considered and taken into account. Tesla’s AI based self driving systems have also been quite dangerous, such as when they accidentally led to a car colliding with an unwary pedestrian.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that these incidents have increase by a massive 690% year over year. About a quarter of these incidents, or 24.5% to be precise, come from three companies, namely Tesla, Meta and OpenAI. This data comes from Surfshark, and with all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that it reveals the worrying trend with AI.

There has been a 261% increase in the number of chatbots online. As these numbers continue to grow, so too will the incidents that put the world in harm’s way. Implementing AI can create enormous seismic shifts, but more work needs to be put into ensuring that these shifts occur in the right direction. Failing to do so could lead to a highly unpredictable outcome in terms of risk.

H/T: Surfshark blog

Read next: The Role of Tech Corporations in Carbon Emissions
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

Bridging the Digital Divide: Global Internet Access Disparities

The World Bank recently released statistics showing that access to internet services on both fixed and mobile devices still varies greatly around the globe.

The most recent World Bank figures have shown considerable differences in internet availability throughout the globe, highlighting the ongoing digital divide between distinct geographic locations. In terms of widespread connectivity via landlines and mobile internet, many developing countries still need help to catch up to wealthy countries.

These statistics illustrate the importance of solving the issue of unequal availability of ICTs (information and communication technology) on a global scale. According to the World Bank, first-world nations have a large excess of mobile cellular customers relative to their populations.

However, the significant discrepancy in internet availability becomes much more evident when considering countries like Pakistan, India, and Nigeria. These countries have barely 80–90 mobile cellular subscriptions per 100 individuals, although they have sizable populations.

This difference hinders their capacity to connect and communicate clearly and presents problems for both social and economic advancement. The situation grows more serious in countries like South Sudan, Mozambique, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In some countries, there are as low as 30–50 lines per 100 people with access to mobile cellular subscriptions.

It is difficult to advance in enterprise, healthcare, or education because of this significant lack of connectedness, exacerbating existing social and economic inequality. Similarly, Afghanistan, Venezuela, and Laos need help to provide adequate access to mobile cellular subscriptions, with approximately 60 subscriptions per 100 people.

This limited availability prevents millions of individuals from harnessing the full potential of digital technologies, including accessing vital information, participating in e-commerce, and connecting with global networks.

It is worth noting that not all individuals in developing nations who possess a mobile phone own a smartphone. NewZoo reports penetration rates as low as 30-40 per cent in Pakistan and Nigeria and 47 per cent in India, leaving a significant portion of the population reliant on feature phones.

Remarkably, some of these devices are 4G-enabled, providing basic connectivity and access to essential services. While sharing mobile phone subscriptions is a widespread practice in economically disadvantaged countries, this phenomenon extends globally when it comes to landline internet access.

Broadband connections have reached unprecedented levels, with as high as 40-50 lines per 100 people in Europe and East Asia and a comparable rate of 37 in the United States. Unfortunately, the situation sharply contrasts in numerous developing nations, where broadband availability and connections are nearly nonexistent.

The discrepancies in global internet access underscore the urgent need for concerted efforts to bridge the digital divide. The World Bank statistics serve as a reminder that encouraging global connection, empowering individuals, and supporting socio-economic development all depend on everyone having equitable access to technology and digital resources.

Governments, non-governmental organisations, and businesses must work together and contribute to creating infrastructure, legal frameworks, and educational programmes that put narrowing the digital divide first. By doing this, we can enable information exchange, empower people and communities, and realise the revolutionary promise of the digital era.

H/T: Statista

Read next: 48% of Consumer Say They’re Ready to Leave Gas-Powered Cars Behind
by Arooj Ahmed via Digital Information World

Retailers Say Too Much Tech is Bad for the Customer Experience

It seems like there is a new form of tech that companies have to incorporate every other day, and they tend to be seen positively due to the assumption that they can boost efficiency. In spite of the fact that this is the case, many retailers are claiming that an overabundance of tech is having a decidedly negative impact on the customer experience with all things having been considered and taken into account.

This comes from a survey that was conducted by Epsilon in collaboration with Phronesis Partners, and it revealed that too many tech vendors can make this rather confusing. With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that too much tech is also having the exact opposite effect in terms of efficiency.

Instead of making things more efficient, a multiplicity of tech vendors is actually making it more difficult for retailers to obtain essential data than might have been the case otherwise. Brands often end up pitching to customers more than once, thereby alienating shoppers along with failing to target customers that have not been reached out to before.

Based on the findings that can be seen in this report, it appears that 37% of companies offering retail services are not using any off site ads. This can be a big risk because of the fact that this is the sort of thing that could potentially end up reducing the number of sales that they can take advantage of in the long run.

However, 42% of companies stated that it can be overly challenging for them to implement these ads due to the aforementioned difficulties pertaining to targeting and tracking of customers, as well as how this can inhibit customization across the board. 76% are of the opinion that ad quality should be held above everything else, and 75% said that inventory is also high on their list of priorities. It will be interesting to see how these companies adapt to the shifting tides, since the influx of tech solutions does not seem like it will go away.

Read next: 25% of Gen Z Want Finance Careers Amid Cost of Living Crisis
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World