One of the strangest episodes in the history of the tech industry ended as start-up events often do: with a party in San Francisco’s eclectic Mission District.

Late Tuesday, OpenAI said Sam Altman was returning as its chief executive, five days after the artificial intelligence start-up’s board of directors forced him out. At the company’s San Francisco office, giddy employees snacked on chicken tenders, drank boba tea and champagne, and celebrated Mr. Altman’s return deep into the night.

Mr. Altman’s reinstatement capped a corporate drama that mixed piles of money, a pressure campaign from allies, intense media attention and a steadfast belief among some in the A.I. community that they should proceed with caution with what they are building.

Now OpenAI, which for two days appeared to be on the brink of collapse just a year after introducing the popular ChatGPT chatbot, will replace a heavily criticized board of directors with a more traditional group including former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers and a former executive from the software giant Salesforce.

More board members, who could be plucked from OpenAI’s biggest investor, Microsoft, and the A.I. research community, are expected to join soon. Mr. Altman was not named to the board on Tuesday night, and it was not clear if he ever will be.

On Wednesday, what appeared to be emerging from the mess was a company better suited to handle the billions of dollars thrown its way and the attention it has received since it released ChatGPT. But some already argue that it will not be as attuned to OpenAI’s original mission to create A.I. that is safe for the world.

The OpenAI debacle has illustrated that building A.I. systems is testing whether businesspeople who want to make money can work in sync with researchers who worry that what they are developing could eventually eliminate jobs or become a threat if technologies like autonomous weapons grow out of control.

The tech industry — perhaps even the world — will be watching to see if OpenAI is any closer to balancing those dueling aspirations than it was a week ago.

“We’ll look back on this period as a very brief, highly dramatic blip that gave us a public and dramatic reset,” said Aaron Levie, the chief executive of Box, an online data storage provider. “This needs to be a trustworthy organization that’s aligned with its board, and at the end of it all, OpenAI is a more valuable organization than it was a week ago.”

When Mr. Altman, 38, was fired just after noon on Friday, OpenAI was pitched into chaos. Its employees and Microsoft, which has invested $13 billion in the company, were blindsided.

The A.I. company has an unusual governance structure. It is controlled by the board of a nonprofit, and its investors have no formal way of influencing decisions. But no one anticipated that four members of the board — including OpenAI’s chief scientist, Ilya Sutskever, a co-founder — would suddenly remove Mr. Altman, claiming that he could no longer be trusted with the company mission to build artificial intelligence that “benefits all of humanity.”

The fallout was immediate. OpenAI’s president, Greg Brockman, who also helped found the company eight years ago, quit in protest.

The board had grown increasingly frustrated with Mr. Altman’s behavior over the last year and thought it needed to get him under control, according to two people familiar with the board’s thinking. One episode, in particular, illustrated how fraught the relationship between the board and Mr. Altman had become.

Both sides focused on an October research paper co-written by Helen Toner, an OpenAI board member who serves as a director of strategy at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology.

Mr. Altman complained to Ms. Toner that the paper seemed to criticize OpenAI’s efforts to keep its technologies safe while praising a rival. He argued that “any amount of criticism from a board member carries a lot of weight,” he wrote in an email to colleagues.

Ms. Toner defended the paper as academic research, but Mr. Altman and other OpenAI leaders, including Mr. Sutskever, later discussed whether she should be removed from the board, a person involved in the conversations said.

But Mr. Sutskever, who is worried that A.I. could one day destroy humanity, unexpectedly sided with Ms. Toner and two other board members: Adam D’Angelo, chief executive of the question-and-answer site Quora, and Tasha McCauley, an adjunct senior management scientist at the RAND Corporation.

Ilya Sutskever, an OpenAI board member and the company’s chief scientist, wrote on social media that he “deeply regretted” his role in ousting Mr. Altman.Credit...Jim Wilson/The New York Times

From left (top), three members of the OpenAI board that ousted Mr. Altman: Adam D’Angelo, Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley.Credit...

Nhat V. Meyer/Bay Area News Group and Jerod Harris/Getty Images

During a video call on Friday, Mr. Sutskever read Mr. Altman a statement that said Mr. Altman was being fired because he was not “consistently candid in his communications with the board.”

Over the next five days, Mr. Altman and his allies pressed the board to bring him back and for the board to resign. On Sunday, he and company executives negotiated at OpenAI’s offices. In the early afternoon, a delivery driver with a dozen drinks from the Boba Guys chain arrived on a motorbike outside with two bags. Then a second delivery driver appeared.

That night, the talks collapsed, and the board named Emmett Shear, a co-founder of Twitch, as interim chief executive.

But Microsoft offered a Plan B: to hire Mr. Altman to run a new A.I. research lab for Microsoft with Mr. Brockman. OpenAI’s executives orchestrated a letter from employees saying they’d follow Mr. Altman to Microsoft if he wasn’t reinstated. More than 700 of OpenAI’s 770 employees signed, including Mr. Sutskever, who said in a post on X that he “deeply regretted” his role in ousting Mr. Altman.

The pressure made the other board members dig in their heels, three people familiar with their thinking said. They were appalled that Mr. Altman and his allies were encouraging a mutiny, and wondered if it could be illegal because the employees had a contractual obligation to the company, not to its chief executive. And they thought that as a board they were acting with integrity and fulfilling their obligation to the nonprofit’s mission.

The board was still determined to force Mr. Altman to change his behavior, two people familiar with the board’s deliberations said. It also had concerns about some of his recent efforts to raise funds for personal interests, such as a drug development start-up, at the same time that he was raising money for OpenAI.

The talks from Saturday through Tuesday centered on how to create a board that everyone could trust. For the current members, that meant finding directors who would check Mr. Altman’s power and push for an independent investigation into his behavior.

While Microsoft supported Mr. Altman’s return to OpenAI, the company worked on backup plans, one person familiar with the matter said. Microsoft employees started to prepare offer letters and to line up immigration lawyers for OpenAI staff on work visas, the person said.

OpenAI’s three board members spent most of Tuesday on Google Meet video calls, discussing board options. They spoke with the chief executive of Microsoft, Satya Nadella, several times, one of these people said.

Mr. Altman’s allies offered a board slate of Mr. D’Angelo, Mr. Summers and Bret Taylor, a seasoned Silicon Valley executive. Mr. Taylor, who will be the new board’s chair, oversaw the $44 billion sale of Twitter to Elon Musk when he led Twitter’s board last year.

Mr. Taylor and Ms. McCauley did not respond to requests for comment. No one involved in discussions has explained how Mr. Summers became an option, and he did not respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.

But he has recently established himself as an authority on A.I. and economics. Mr. Summers has warned that ChatGPT will come for the “cognitive class,” changing how doctors make diagnoses, editors work on books and Wall Street traders invest. He has also served on the boards of other technology companies, including the financial services company Block, formerly known as Square.

The board considered Mr. Summers to be an independent thinker with enough management experience to hold his ground against Mr. Altman, said two of the people familiar with the negotiations.

By Tuesday evening, they had a deal. Thanksgiving helped. Despite all their disagreements, everyone agreed the chaos should not spill into Thursday, one person said.

But there is still plenty of work to be done. Over the next six months, the board will analyze and potentially change OpenAI’s unusual structure, one of these people said.

After the decision to bring back Mr. Altman, OpenAI workers filled employee Slack channels with heart emojis and images of a frog, known as “froge,” that has become an unofficial corporate mascot, three employees said.

Late Tuesday, employees gathered at the company’s office to drink boba tea — an inside reference to news coverage over the weekend. Mr. Brockman posted a selfie with dozens of smiling workers in the office around midnight.

The caption read: “we are so back.”

Source

For much of the past year, OpenAI’s board of directors has been criticized as too small and too divided to effectively govern one of the fastest-growing start-ups in Silicon Valley history.

On Friday, the board’s dysfunction spilled into public view when four of its members fired Sam Altman, OpenAI’s popular and powerful chief executive. The dismissal uncorked five turbulent days, as Mr. Altman rallied almost all of the company’s 770 employees to lobby for the board’s resignation and his reinstatement.

Mr. Altman, 38, returned to the company on Tuesday night, after days of haggling over his job and over the makeup of the board.

The board and Mr. Altman’s allies discussed more than a half dozen options for its future. They considered a board size of three to seven members and discussed about 30 candidates, including Laurene Powell Jobs, the founder of the Emerson Collective and widow of Steve Jobs, and Brian Chesky, the chief executive of Airbnb. The departing board wanted to be sure the replacements would be independent thinkers and experienced enough to stand up to Mr. Altman.

On Tuesday evening, both sides agreed to create a provisional, three-person board. It is expected to expand in the coming months, two people close to the negotiations said, but the exact number was unclear. The new group will be responsible for analyzing the structure of OpenAI, the ChatGPT chatbot developer, which started as a nonprofit in 2015 but later added a for-profit subsidiary.

Who is off the board?

• Sam Altman: A co-founder of OpenAI, Mr. Altman had been on its board from the start. One of the key sticking points during negotiations with board members was their opposition to his return to his seat. Mr. Altman fought for several days, two people familiar with the negotiations said. On Tuesday, he relented — at least for now.

• Greg Brockman: A co-founder of OpenAI and the board’s chairman until last week, Mr. Brockman quit his role as president on Friday in solidarity with Mr. Altman. He expressed interest in returning to the board during negotiations, but its members rejected that possibility, the two people said. Now he is returning to OpenAI as a senior employee with his title yet to be determined. He celebrated his return with colleagues at OpenAI’s offices on Tuesday night. On X, formerly Twitter, he posted a selfie with dozens of employees and said, “we are so back.”

• Ilya Sutskever: A co-founder and top researcher at OpenAI, Mr. Sutskever was born in the Soviet Union and spent years working at the University of Toronto and later at Google with the world’s leading A.I. researchers. He spent eight years as OpenAI’s well-regarded chief scientist. But last week, he turned on his colleagues and sided with the board’s three independent directors to oust Mr. Altman. Mr. Sutskever told Mr. Altman that he was being pushed out and then stood his ground until Sunday, when OpenAI employees threatened to leave en masse and Mr. Brockman’s wife, Anna, urged him to reinstate Mr. Altman. After expressing regret publicly for his decision to turn on Mr. Altman, Mr. Sutskever agreed to step off the board on Tuesday.

• Helen Toner: An independent board member since 2021, Ms. Toner joined OpenAI at the suggestion of Holden Karnofsky, a board member who stepped down that year because his wife was affiliated with a rival A.I. company, Anthropic. Ms. Toner is a director of strategy at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, a think tank, where she writes about national security issues. She agreed to leave the board.

• Tasha McCauley: An independent board member since at least 2018, Ms. McCauley is an adjunct senior management scientist at the RAND Corporation, one of the country’s oldest think tanks, and married to the actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt. She also serves on the British board of Effective Ventures, a federation of effective altruist organizations. She agreed to leave the board.

Who is on the board?

Adam D’Angelo: An early Facebook executive and a co-founder of the question site Quora, Mr. D’Angelo was one of the board members who ousted Mr. Altman. He was the board’s main leader in negotiations and held out for concessions from Mr. Altman during the tense back and forth, two people familiar with the talks said.

Bret Taylor: A fixture of Silicon Valley technical circles and a former Facebook and Salesforce executive, Mr. Taylor was seen during negotiations as a neutral party, three people familiar with the discussions said. He is well regarded among the technorati and is often thought of as a kind of mediator in high-pressure situations. Last year, as a board chairman at Twitter, he was instrumental in negotiating the platform’s $44 billion sale to Elon Musk.

Lawrence H. Summers: One of the country’s most prominent economists, Mr. Summers was a late addition to the list of potential board candidates and critical to ending the impasse over how to proceed because he was believed to be someone who would stand up to Mr. Altman, two of the people familiar with the talks said. Mr. Summers served as Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration and was president of Harvard. He has been speaking out about the potential for artificial intelligence to displace workers, but his reputation has been damaged over the years. While leading Harvard, he said women might lack an intrinsic aptitude for math and science.

Where is the diversity?

Gender and diversity didn’t play a role in deliberations about the board, two of the people said. At various points during negotiations, there were permutations of the board that would have kept Ms. Toner or Ms. McCauley involved.

One of the people involved in the negotiations said that the most important thing was to get a resolution, and that achieving one had some constraints, including that the pool of candidates was largely white and male. The provisional board is expected to become more diverse as it expands in the coming months.

Source

Ubisoft, based in France, is renowned for its Assassin's Creed, Ghost Recon and Watch Dogs game franchises. Windows Central reports about a video that XboxSquad.fr reporter and co-founder @Fab_XS_, shared on Twitter, to highlight an issue that he ran into while playing a game on his Xbox.

Ubisoft is displaying a pop-up ad in game menus

The video features a gameplay of Assassin's Creed Odyssey, but suddenly shows a pop-up ad for Assassin's Creed Mirage, which is the latest iteration in the popular franchise. The pop-up advert promotes the game by saying it is discounted by 20% off of its original price, as part of the ongoing Black Friday Sale. The ad in question has two buttons, one to close it, and one that takes you to the store to buy the game.

That does not sound too bad, right? Well, it is the pop-up is reportedly a 3-second ad, and it appears when you access the Pause Menu or the Map. So, this effectively interferes with the gameplay. If you observe the video closely, you can notice a small time-frame where a loading icon appears, which means it is fetching the ad from the cloud. That could explain the 3-second delay.

The thing is, this is not the first time Ubisoft has tried ads in its games, it has done so in the past, though they are usually done to promote in-app purchases for the current game that is being played.

According to Fab_XS these pop-up ads in game menus only appear on Xbox and PlayStation consoles. It is likely that Ubisoft Connect users on PC are not affected by these ads.

Fab_XS commented on Twitter asking whether this could be annoying enough to irk people into uninstalling the game that displayed the ad. He makes a good point. Nobody likes ads, whether they are displayed on websites, while watching videos, banners in apps or games. Ads are quite common in free-to-play games and mobile games. Assassin's Creed Mirage is a premium game (it still has in-app purchases, but that's a different problem), and so is Odyssey. Mirage is actually selling rather well, and has been welcomed by gamers and reviewers positively. There is absolutely no reason why Ubisoft has to resort to such measures to advertise about it. On a side note, Mirage is available via Ubisoft+ too and is supported on GeForce NOW.

There are better ways to promote games and discounts for the titles, email newsletters, or notifications when a game from my wishlist goes on sale, are a less offensive way to inform gamers about offers. Personally, I wouldn't mind a small banner in a corner of the main menu that displays a banner to highlight an offer for latest games, but an ad that impacts the gameplay is a not acceptable in my opinion. Hopefully, this pop-up ad does not become a thing that other game publishers decide to implement in their titles.

What do you think about pop-up ads in game menus?

Source

Scrolling through social media can feel like a nightmare these days. You’re reading about the horrors of the Israel-Hamas war, and then you’re reading about the horrors of the war between Ukraine and Russia. You’re learning about the latest devastating climate news. Democracy is under threat in America. It can feel like everything is falling apart.

This, of course, can have a significant effect on your mental health. You start to feel overwhelmed. Not only are you dealing with the regular stresses of daily life—your job, your finances, your personal relationships—but now you’re thinking about the most serious problems the world is facing. Social media algorithms tend to elevate the most contentious content, so these feeds are showing you things that will elicit a visceral response—they’re putting the doom in doomscrolling.

According to psychology experts, this has become a serious problem. People are ingesting too much negative news, and it’s not only affecting them personally but impacting society at large. People can handle some bad news, but what if it’s a lot of bad news? And what if a lot of people are doing this while trying to function in the world together?

Matthew Price, a professor of psychological science at the University of Vermont, says that stress is cumulative. One thing starts stressing you out, and then it’s another thing, and then one more thing. Suddenly, you’re spiraling. He says the stress can continue throughout your day even when you’ve stopped bingeing on bad news on social media.

“Some of the work that we have done has shown it definitely increases your stress in the moment. It could increase your stress throughout the rest of your day,” Price says. “When you doomscroll, it gets much easier to reach your limit than I think you would if you weren’t doing that.”

Price says ingesting a lot of negative news can cause anxiety and depression, at least for some period of time, but it’s especially likely to “exacerbate” anxiety, depression, and PTSD in people who have a history of experiencing those conditions. He says that people often doomscroll because there’s something bad going on and they want to find a way to fix the problem they’re reading about.

“When we’re doomscrolling, we’re kind of looking for the resolution to the issue. Read some more posts. Read some more articles. If I get more information, then maybe I’ll understand the problem,” Price says, describing the doomscrolling cycle.

This doesn’t just affect individuals. When a lot of people are experiencing the stress of the news of the world at once, it can make them more likely to “snap at each other,” Price says. We may not realize it, but the reason that guy was rude to you at Starbucks might be that he has read too many damn scary news articles.

“When you have multiple people who are struggling, they’re going to have a harder time communicating together,” says Bethany Teachman, a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia. “We have to think of these things from a systemic perspective or we’re not going to be very effective at making change.”

Teachman says doomscrolling can “skew our sense of what’s going on.” You start to think everything and everyone is the worst, but it’s quite possible little of it is actually affecting you personally. Perhaps terrible news from around the world would not be changing your daily life unless you were reading about it, and it’s important to recognize when it’s time to log off.

“We do need to stay informed, but when we move past informed to feeling overwhelmed and often paralyzed and feeling like we’re under constant threat, it’s clearly crossed over into a negative place,” Teachman says. “I think part of what’s happening is most of the news stories tend to be negative, so it gives us this sense that we’re in a constant state of danger and that we are vulnerable and the world is a very dangerous place.”

In terms of solutions, Teachman says people need to limit their exposure to social media and the news to keep their lives balanced. It’s OK to read some news to stay informed and check out what people are saying online, but it can get unhealthy if you overdo it. Once you’ve read enough to know what’s going on, think of other things that you enjoy doing and that help you maintain your mental health, she says.

“It’s not about ‘this is a bad thing and this is a good thing.’ It’s about how you engage with it and how it fits in with the rest of what’s going on in your life,” Teachman says. “How are you living the rest of your life, and what are the impacts on that?”

If you’re feeling overwhelmed by the news, Teachman says it’s important to consider what your values are and how you can act on those values in your daily life. Think about who you want to be and what you want to accomplish. This can focus your mind when you’re feeling overwhelmed.

If you’re not feeling like you’re who you want to be right now, she says, think of small things you can do to get closer to becoming that person. Think about the things you can do to get closer to that goal so you’re more capable of handling stress and feeling mentally well, and about the things you can do to help solve the problems you’re worried about.

“Take a step back from your social media. Take a step back from your phone. Take a step back from the stressors unless the thing that’s stressful is imminently going to harm you,” Price says. “And get more local.”

Price says that acting locally on issues you’re concerned about can help you maintain your mental health because otherwise things can feel too far away and too difficult to solve. Maybe you can’t end a war, but perhaps you can help some people in your community or get your community to do something that helps a bigger problem.

People are overwhelmed. They’re tired. Sometimes you want to just curl up in a ball and pull your comforter over your head. Teachman says that’s the worst thing you can do for your mental health. It’s important to connect with people to maintain your mental health, she says, and sometimes you can connect with people and be part of the solution to a problem at the same time.

Source

The AI algorithm, reportedly named OpenAI Q-star, represents a leap forward in the quest for artificial general intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical AI capable of surpassing human intelligence in most economically valuable tasks.

Researchers believe OpenAI Q-star's ability to solve mathematical problems, albeit at a grade-school level, indicates its potential to develop reasoning capabilities akin to human intelligence.

However, the researchers also highlighted the potential dangers of such advanced AI, citing long-standing concerns among computer scientists about the possibility of AI posing a threat to humanity. They emphasized the need for careful consideration of the ethical implications of this technology and the importance of developing safeguards to prevent its misuse.

OpenAI Q-star might have been in the works for a few months now

Sam Altman's eventful firing, his deal with Microsoft, his comeback, and the artificial intelligence company OpenAI shook the entire technology world today with OpenAI Q-star. To understand what this system is, we first need to understand what an AGI is and what it can do.

Artificial general intelligence (AGI), also known as strong AI or full AI, is a hypothetical type of AI that would possess the ability to understand and reason at the same level as a human being. AGI would be capable of performing any intellectual task that a human can, and would likely far surpass human capabilities in many areas.

While AGI does not yet exist, many experts believed that it is only a matter of time before it is achieved. Some experts, such as Ray Kurzweil, believe that AGI could be achieved by 2045. Others, such as Stuart Russell, believe that it is more likely to take centuries.

Rowan Cheung, founder of Rundown AI, posted on Twitter/X that Sam Altman said in a speech the day before he left OpenAI: "Is this a tool we've built or a creature we have built?".

Although the OpenAI Q-star news came out today, let's take you back in time.

On May 31, 2023, OpenAI shared a blog post titled: "Improving Mathematical Reasoning with Process Supervision".

In the blog post, OpenAI described a new method for training large language models to perform mathematical problem solving. This method, called "process supervision", involves rewarding the model for each correct step in a chain-of-thought, rather than just for the correct final answer.

The authors of the article conducted a study to compare process supervision to the traditional method of "outcome supervision". They found that process supervision led to significantly better performance on a benchmark dataset of mathematical problems.

If we look back at the Reuters report, they say that they received the following statements from an anonymous person related to OpenAI: ''Some at OpenAI believe Q* (pronounced OpenAI Q-Star) could be a breakthrough in the startup's search for what's known as artificial general intelligence (AGI), told one of the insiders. OpenAI defines AGI as autonomous systems that surpass humans in most economically valuable tasks.

Given vast computing resources, the new model was able to solve certain mathematical problems, the person said on condition of anonymity because the individual was not authorized to speak on behalf of the company. Though only performing math on the level of grade-school students, acing such tests made researchers very optimistic about Q*’s future success, the source said''.

We are aware that OpenAI's research on process supervision was done using GPT-4, but the "new model was able to solve certain mathematical problems" mentioned by the anonymous person who spoke to Reuters is quite similar to the methodology used in past research.

Where is the catch?

Let's talk about why the entire tech world has reacted so strongly to OpenAI Q-star. I am sure that you have seen the theme of artificial intelligence taking over the world with its integration into human life in Sci-Fi movies.

Hal-900 in The 2001 Space Odyssey, Skynet in The Terminator, and Agents in The Matrix are the best-known examples of this theme and the theme of these films is that an artificial intelligence model trains itself to come to the conclusion that humanity is harmful to the world. That's one of the horrible outcomes of the AGI. We know that AI models are nowadays being developed by training on a specific database, which raises all sorts of privacy concerns.

As you may recall, for this reason alone, many countries, such as Italy, have banned the use of ChatGPT within their borders.

What if AI models could solve complex problems themselves without the need for a database? Would it be possible to predict the outcome and whether it would be useful for us?

The regulation of AI has started to be talked about at this point, but no one knows what kind of research companies are doing behind closed doors.

Of course, we are not saying that OpenAI Q-star will be the end of humanity. But the uncertainty is an element that arouses fear in humans as in every biological creature.

Perhaps Sam Altman also had these question marks inside his head when he said, "Is this a tool we've built or a creature we have built".

How about the good ending?

Maybe there is no need to be so pessimistic and OpenAI Q-star will be one of the biggest steps towards a brighter future the world and the scientific community have ever taken. Potentially, AGIs could be capable of solving problems that humans cannot interpret or solve.

Imagine a scientist who never gets tired and can interpret problems analytically with one hundred percent accuracy. How long do you think it will take this scientist to find a solution to cancer, which has caused millions of deaths over thousands of years, by finding out why sharks don't suffer from cancer?

What if all the problems in the world such as hunger, global warming, and soil pollution were no longer on our world's neck when you wake up tomorrow? Yes, a properly functioning AGI can do all this too.

Maybe it is too early to talk about all this and we are just being paranoid. Let's leave it all to time and hope for the best for all of us.

Source

What you need to know

• Xbox consoles are said to today be showing players a message stating that Microsoft Xbox Rewards is coming to a close.
• The weekly series of quests will continue in the app until the end of November, and be removed permanently from December. Moving forward, those quests would display in a new Rewards tab in your Xbox profile. 
• However, the tab doesn't seem to support streaks and some of the other bonuses the old Microsoft Rewards app has. 
• The weekly Microsoft Xbox Rewards quests are an easy way for players to earn points towards Xbox purchases.
• The news was originally broken on Twitter by user IdleSloth, and a screenshot was shown in Portuguese — we haven't yet been able to replicate the message on a US, German, or UK console.

Freebie fans who enjoy collecting Microsoft Reward points via their Xbox dashboard are facing a significant letdown today. It seems that Microsoft could be discontinuing the weekly reward quests on the console and shutting down the Microsoft Rewards app entirely on Xbox.

Microsoft Rewards is a free, no-brainer program that lets you earn points going about your daily tasks on the platform. Points can be earned by shopping, using Bing search, and gaming on Xbox, Windows PC, and mobile. The message shown indicates activities will simply move to another Rewards app, but previous changes in the past 12 months have always seemed to spell less rewards, so we are not optimistic.

The news broke today on X (Twitter):

The message itself is in Portuguese, and so far nobody on the Windows Central team has managed to get it to appear on a US or UK region Xbox, so we cannot confirm if this is a worldwide change or not. We will update as we know more.

The message translated to English using Google reads: 

Earn Rewards with Xbox

We recreated, simplified, and integrated the Rewards experience on Xbox, making it all about gameplay and the activities that players love most. With the new Rewards hub on Xbox, players will no longer need to have separate apps to earn or redeem Reward points.

Starting December 2023, we will no longer publish offers in the Microsoft Rewards app on Xbox, focusing instead on new activities in the new Rewards hub. Basically, this change is intended to simplify and streamline the Rewards experience for players and helps access all Xbox-related offers and activities in one convenient location. The weekly series continues until the end of November and, after that, it will be deactivated in the application, along with the weekly sequence.

Xbox Rewards will remain part of the Microsoft Rewards program, and all points you earn on Xbox will continue in other parts of the program. To maximize your points and earn even more, be sure to check out the hub.

What's the big deal?

While the message suggests a straightforward transition of the Reward system to another "streamlined" app, it signifies the conclusion of many players' weekly streaks for the Microsoft Rewards weekly activities — a streak held in high regard by numerous players, some boasting two-year streaks. For context, a 10-week streak yields 2500 points. This has been one of the few effective methods left to accumulate points. It should be noted that the Xbox Rewards dashboard currently available on your profile page on your Xbox was additive to a lot of the quests we get on the Microsoft Rewards for Xbox app — removing the separate app will result in cumulatively fewer rewards overall. That's not to say the Rewards tab won't suddenly get more quests as a result of this reported shutdown, but there are reasons to be skeptical (more on that in a minute).

In addition to this, the Microsoft Rewards dashboard on Xbox has been notably less rewarding in recent months, progressively declining in available activities since the controversial relocation of 'Achieve More, Earn More' to the Game Pass app.

Message gamers were met with in March on the Xbox Rewards Dashboard. (Image credit: Jennifer Young - Windows Central)

Microsoft Rewards for Xbox has been going downhill for a long time

The removal of 'Achieve More. Earn More' (AMEM) marked a downward trajectory for Microsoft Rewards on Xbox. Numerous activities have been removed from the dashboard since then, transforming an app that was once a priority when I turned on my Xbox, into an afterthought. In short, it has been significantly nerfed. Previously, in the UK, I could easily earn 2500-3000 points per month, which was quite handy for covering expenses like Diablo 4 battle passes with Microsoft Reward points.

The nature of the new app and whether it will be more rewarding than current activities remains uncertain. However, historical patterns indicate that changes to the Rewards system on Xbox have not been favorable.

The reality is that Microsoft Rewards was always designed to be something that would drive people to use Bing.com, rather than Xbox. If people are earning enough points without actively using Bing for their searches, Microsoft may see that as defeating the point for them. 

Can I still earn Microsoft Rewards points elsewhere?

Yes. There aren't any changes right now to the current system which lets you earn Microsoft Reward points by searching on Bing, spending money in the Microsoft Store and exploring the daily activities on Microsoft Rewards.

Updates on how it will operate on Xbox from December are eagerly awaited. This article will be updated as more information becomes available, and if other regions begin to experience the same message.

Source

In a tweet earlier today, Elon Musk announced that the company is looking to add back headlines. Musk noted that in a future release, X will overlay the title on the top of the image, allowing users to read the title on the platform.

In October, X began removing headlines from articles and news pieces on the platform. The company also stripped any other information that was overlayed on the image to "improve the esthetics" of the site and also to drive original content on the platform.

X has seen drastic changes since Elon Musk bought the service late last year. The company has been working on adding more features and changes to the service that suits the Blue subscribers while setting it apart from the competition. Recently, X announced that it will allow verified and paying X Blue users to hide their blue checkmarks. The company also made changes to how many messages unverified users can send, in an attempt to curb spam Direct Messages.

Musk has also been working on new services as well that will be integrated into X in the future. Recently, a report claimed that Musk is looking to use his knowledge from the PayPal days to build a finance system into X that will be faster than PayPal. Earlier this month, he also showcased Grok, X's generative AI-based chatbot. There is no word on when either of the new services will make their way to the public but it was rumoured that Musk will give limited users access to Grok.

Source

Up until this year, game engines were not something most gamers had to give much thought to beyond the one or two seconds their logos might appear while a game was loading.

 

That changed this fall when popular pick Unity went from a remarkable anybody-can-make-a-game tool to a developer-enraging, threat-generating, CEO-resignation mess. CD Projekt Red, maker of The Witcher and Cyberpunk 2077, made a point of stating that its next games would be built with the Unreal Engine, not its in-house REDengine. After Cities: Skylines 2 launched with notably rough performance, deep decompilation analysis found a bunch of seemingly Unity-related, or at least Unity-adjacent, issues.

 

That's why this news about another big change in a popular game engine is so striking: it's generally good. GameMaker (formerly Game Maker Studio), a 2D engine that was acquired by browser firm Opera in 2021, has simplified its licensing structure, declaring it "Free for Non-Commercial Use."

 

If you're making a game with GameMaker for release on consoles, you have to pay for an ongoing $80-per-month Enterprise package. If you're trying to sell a game on other platforms (PC, mobile, browser), there's a one-time $100 fee. If you're just messing about or making something that's not for sale, it's free. And GameMaker's asset bundles are free now, too. And some existing subscribers might now get a free commercial license. There is, notably, no mention of "run-time" or per-install fees.

 

YoYo Games, creator of GameMaker, describes the moves as a way to "Say 'Thank you,'" as well as a response to "other platforms making awkward moves with their pricing and terms." Game Developer notes that this is the second pricing switch since Opera acquired the studio, after an initial move to make tinkering with the engine free, up until you publish.

 

Russell Kay, head of GameMaker and a former developer on Lemmings, Grand Theft Auto (the 2D versions), and other games, writes that since Opera's acquisition and subsequent freemium-like moves, the engine has seen "a three-fold increase in its active users," with more than 6,000 games published on its gx.games platform.

 

GameMaker's tech underlies several clever low-key hits: Gunpoint, Undertale, Hotline Miami, Spelunky, Crashlands, Hyper Light Drifter, Risk of Rain, and Chicory: A colourful Tale.

 

Source

Reuters

November 22, 20238:34 AM EST

LONDON, Nov 21 (Reuters) - Sony (6758.T) must face a mass lawsuit worth up to 6.3 billion pounds ($7.9 billion) over claims the PlayStation maker abused its dominant position leading to unfair prices for customers, a London tribunal ruled on Tuesday.

Sony Interactive Entertainment (SIE) was sued last year on behalf of nearly 9 million people in the United Kingdom who had bought digital games or add-on content through Sony's PlayStation Store.

Her lawyers said the aggregate damages estimate of the case was up to 6.3 billion pounds in court filings last month.

She says the company abused its dominant position by requiring digital games and add-ons to be bought and sold only via the PlayStation Store, which charges a 30% commission to developers and publishers.

Inside a GameStop store Sony PS5 gaming consoles are pictured in the Manhattan borough of New York City, New York, U.S.,

November 12, 2020. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri/File Photo

The claim alleges customers have therefore paid higher prices for games and add-on content than they would have done.

Sony's lawyers argued the case was "flawed from start to finish" and said it should be thrown out.

The Competition Appeal Tribunal ruled that Neill's case could continue, though it said people who had made PlayStation Store purchases after the case was filed in 2022 should be removed from the proposed claimant class.

($1 = 0.8025 pound)

Source

Net income came in at $9.243 billion for the third quarter of 2023 for NVIDIA. That is 1,259 percent higher than its net income of "just" $680 million for the same quarter a year ago. The numbers was also above the estimates from financial analysts.

Its Data Center division, which includes its generative AI GPU business, brought in $14.51 billion in revenues for the third quarter, which is up 279 percent from the same period a year ago.

However, the company announced in a letter to shareholders that due to export restrictions to China and other countries, revenues from those areas "will decline significantly" in the current fourth quarter of 2023, although NVIDIA added it expects revenues in other regions will offset those declines. Even with that statement, shares in NVIDIA were down by over 1 percent in after-hours training.

In a statement, Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA, wrote:

Large language model startups, consumer internet companies and global cloud service providers were the first movers, and the next waves are starting to build. Nations and regional CSPs are investing in AI clouds to serve local demand, enterprise software companies are adding AI copilots and assistants to their platforms, and enterprises are creating custom AI to automate the world’s largest industries. NVIDIA GPUs, CPUs, networking, AI foundry services and NVIDIA AI Enterprise software are all growth engines in full throttle. The era of generative AI is taking off.

NVIDIA's gaming business was successful as well in the third quarter with revenues of $2.86 billion which was up 81 percent from the same period a year ago. The company is holding a press event at CES 2024 in Las Vegas on January 8, where it is rumored it could launch new GeForce Series 40 "Super" GPUs.

Source

Source

Source

Previously, Space Marine 2 was targeting a release before the end of 2023. However, in a statement, Focus Entertainment said it decided to delay the game further to give the development team more time to polish and finalize the experience.

The game is now poised to ship in the second half of 2024, to provide the time needed to properly polish the game and to ensure the best possible experience. Focus Entertainment is committed to releasing a game that is of the highest quality and that exceeds the expectations of the countless fans of the franchise.

Despite the long delay, the developer did provide some good news: fans can expect the official release date announcement for Space Marine 2 in early December, possibly during The Game Awards on December 7. On that day, Owlcat Games also plans to launch Rogue Trader for PC, Xbox, PS5 and Mac.

Rogue Trader will offer an open-ended experience with meaningful player choices that can impact how the story unfolds. Players will recruit various unique companions to their crew, including a Space Marine from the Space Wolves chapter.

Space Marine 2 will continue the story of Space Marine hero Captain Titus as he battles to stem the tide of the Tyranid invasion. In previews earlier this year, Focus showed off the game's combo-driven melee combat and large-scale battles. The game is planned as a third-person action experience for Xbox Series X|S, PC, and PlayStation 5.

In case you missed it, Games Workshop held its annual Warhammer Skulls event in May and announced several new Warhammer 40,000 titles. The Warhammer 40k universe and CRPG fans can look forward to new adventures this coming December.

Source

Traditional SMS messages are restricted to 160 characters, which is often insufficient for conveying complex information or sharing lengthy messages. This limitation can lead to frustration and delays in communication.

Apart from that, SMS does not support the sharing of multimedia content, including high-quality images, videos, and audio files. This limits its ability to capture attention, express emotions, and enhance the overall messaging experience.

To address these limitations, Rich Communication Services (RCS) has emerged as a modern messaging protocol that offers a more comprehensive and engaging experience. RCS chat supports higher character limits, multimedia attachments, and real-time messaging features, making it a more versatile and user-friendly platform for both personal and business communication.

What is RCS chat?

RCS is a communication protocol provided by Google for Android devices that empowers users with advanced communication features and capabilities.

RCS chat offers a host of features that transform the way we communicate through text-based messaging, including:

• High-resolution media sharing: RCS chat enables the sharing of high-resolution photos and videos without compression, preserving the original quality and details
• Read receipts and typing indicators: RCS provides read receipts, confirming that your messages have been read, and typing indicators, showing when the recipient is composing a reply
• Group chats: RCS chat facilitates group conversations with multiple participants, allowing for seamless coordination and discussions
• Location sharing: RCS allows users to share their location with each other, making it easier to meet up or find directions
• Message reactions: RCS introduces message reactions, enabling users to express their thoughts and feelings with emojis or symbols
• End-to-end encryption: RCS chat supports end-to-end encryption, ensuring the privacy and security of sensitive conversations

Widespread adaptation on the way

RCS adoption has been growing steadily, and it is expected to become the de facto standard for messaging in the near future. In November 2023, Apple announced that it would adopt the RCS messaging standard for iPhone sometime in 2024, according to 9to5Mac.

This move is expected to accelerate the adoption of RCS and make it the go-to messaging platform for both Android and iOS users.

How to use RCS chat

To use RCS chat, you will need to have an Android device that is running Android 5.0 or later. You will also need to have a mobile data plan or be connected to a Wi-Fi network.

Once you have the necessary requirements, you can enable RCS chat by following these steps:

1. Open the Messages app on your Android device
2. In the top left corner of the screen, tap on your profile photo
3. Tap Settings
4. Tap Chats
5. Tap RCS Chats
6. Tap Turn on RCS Chats

If RCS chat is not available for your device or carrier, you will not see the option to turn it on.

Once you have enabled RCS chat, you can use it to send and receive messages to other people who also have RCS chat enabled. To send an RCS chat message, simply compose your message and then tap on the Send button.

The message will be sent as an RCS chat if the recipient also has RCS chat enabled. If the recipient does not have RCS chat enabled, the message will be sent as an SMS message.

Source

The search engine results pages (SERPs) for medical queries have recently undergone notable changes. They have become more user-friendly and trustworthy. Introducing the “Ask a doctor” feature is one of the most significant changes. This feature allows users to receive immediate answers to their medical questions from qualified doctors. The feature is similar to the “People also ask” section. When asked a diabetes-related question, it links to the American Diabetes Association’s landing page.

The “People Also Ask” (PAA) section is a Google Search feature that displays additional questions related to the user’s original search query. It appears below the featured snippet and above the organic search results. The questions are generated based on user searches and aim to provide further context and information on the topic.

Patients can receive prompt and accurate medical advice from certified doctors. The SERPs also feature an improved visual design, making them more user-friendly and easier to navigate. Moreover, the SERPs now provide a more comprehensive range of information sources, offering users a wider selection of relevant and reliable content.

Overall, the changes to medical SERPs are positive. They are making it easier for users to find the information they need and providing more opportunities for healthcare providers to reach patients.

Source

The Chrome Web Store is an online marketplace provided by Google for users of the Google Chrome web browser. It allows users to discover, download, and install various extensions, themes, apps, and games to enhance their browsing experience and customize their Chrome interface.

The new store boasts a vibrant colour palette, updated card styles, and enhanced icon legibility, aligning seamlessly with Google’s Material You design language, creating a cohesive visual experience across Chrome’s ecosystem.

The revamped store introduces new extension categories, including AI-powered and shopping extensions. The Editors’ Spotlight feature also highlights newly launched extensions that the Google team recommends exploring.

The Chrome Web Store has improved its user interface to make it more user-friendly and intuitive. The search bar is now located at the top right corner of the screen, making it easily accessible for users. Additionally, the search capabilities have been improved, allowing users to filter results by all items or featured extensions and themes.

In my opinion, with its fresh design, improved navigation, and tailored recommendations, the new Chrome Web Store’s game is set to be elevated.

Source

In addition, CD PROJEKT RED said that customers will also get access to a set of previously released digital goodies through the My Rewards program if they decide to register.

Some users in the CD PROJEKT RED forum have expressed disappointment over the Ultimate Edition because it doesn’t add enough exclusive content for them. It’s a fair point, if you already have Cyberpunk 2077 and Phantom Liberty, then the Ultimate Edition might not be worth buying.

No pricing details have been unveiled yet either so once it does go on sale, you will need to assess whether the Ultimate Edition is better value for money compared to buying a bundle containing the base game and the Phantom Liberty expansion.

The Phantom Liberty expansion is itself a fairly new release, only arriving on September 26. Describing its earlier this year, CD PROJEKT RED said:

“In Phantom Liberty, players once again take on the role of V, a cyberpunk for hire, as they embark on a mission to save the President of the New United States of America after her orbital shuttle is shot down over the deadliest district of Night City — Dogtown. What follows is a deep dive into an intricate story of espionage and political intrigue which connects the highest echelons of power with the brutal world of black-market mercenaries.”

Keanu Reeves played Johnny Silverhand in the original release and reprized his role in the expansion. Joining him in the expansion was Idris Elba, another Hollywood actor, who played the role of Solomon Reed.

Let us know in the comments if the Ultimate Edition has enough to entice you to buy it.

Source: CD PROJEKT RED

Source

• So the three remaining OpenAI Board members should explain why they fired him and move on.

• If the board was trying to save humanity from OpenAI's products, the attempt failed — but thank you!

The bizarre soap opera that is OpenAI has entered its fifth day.

As yet, there is no formal resolution, but as Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said on TV, the practical outcome is known:

OpenAI employees will continue to build OpenAI's products, and Sam Altman will continue to lead them.

Altman will either manage the OpenAI team from his new role at Microsoft or from his old role at OpenAI. And he'll have more control over the product and team than he did before the OpenAI Board's botched attempted coup.

So it's time for the three remaining members of the OpenAI board to end the distraction, tell us what really motivated them, and move on.

It's still not clear why the OpenAI board fired Altman. The stated reason — that he lied to them — has not held up under scrutiny. As Business Insider's Kali Hays reported, when asked for specifics about Altman's alleged dishonesty, one of the board members who ousted him gave two vague and flimsy examples, neither of which — even if fairly represented — seems like a firing offense.

That board member, moreover, has since recanted, saying he regrets ousting Altman and wants him back.

That leaves the other three board members in an even stranger and more tenuous position.

There seem to be two main theories about the real reason the board fired Altman:

• First, that OpenAI rolled out a new feature that competes directly with a new feature of Quora, the question-and-answer site helmed by OpenAI board member Adam D'Angelo. Maybe Altman didn't give D'Angelo, a heads-up, and D'Angelo was pissed about this.

• Second, that the board fears that OpenAI is moving too fast and recklessly and that it will invent (or already has invented) a sentient AI that will have no use for meat-based life forms and will therefore exterminate all life in the universe.

This second reason would certainly be a valid reason for trying to hit the brakes at OpenAI, even if it is unpopular within the tech community.

But, as Business Insider's Alistair Barr has argued, if the goal of the three remaining OpenAI Board members is to save humans from OpenAI's product, it's time for those board members to say so.

Personally, I don't think the three remaining OpenAI board members have as much control over the future of AI and the fate of the universe as they may think. If it's so easy to build a Cylon empire, then one of the dozens of other companies that are racing to advance AI will probably do it, even if OpenAI doesn't.

So, if that's the issue, regardless of what the OpenAI board does next, humanity's probably toast.

As a member of humanity, I do thank the three remaining OpenAI members for maybe looking out for us.

But, regardless, it's time for them to tell us what they're thinking!

Because Sam Altman is going to be leading the OpenAI team and continuing its product development either way.

Source

The report from O'Reilly shows many are still in the early stages of the AI journey, however. 18 percent report having applications in production, but there are multiple bottlenecks for enterprises looking to implement these technologies. First is identifying appropriate use cases (53 percent), followed by legal issues, risk, and compliance (38 percent).

"Generative AI is a gateway to a new era of opportunity for businesses, with the potential to drive growth, optimize operations, and deliver exceptional customer experiences that set them apart from the competition," says Mary Treseler, chief content officer at O'Reilly. "But without the proper talent in place to manage it, this rapidly evolving technology can quickly outpace enterprise resources. As this groundbreaking report unveils, we are far from reaching the peak of what generative AI can achieve, and organizations still have time to invest in the critical skills development required to be at the forefront of the AI revolution."

The rapid adoption of generative AI has also created a demand for technology workers with the expertise to move efforts along, with AI programming (66 percent), data analysis (59 percent), and operations for AI/ML (54 percent) the most-needed skills. General AI literacy (52 percent) is also critical, as users have learned when encountering the hallucinations generative AI tools sometimes exhibit.

In terms of risk, O'Reilly asked those whose companies are working with AI what they’re testing for. The top five responses are unexpected outcomes (49 percent), security vulnerabilities (48 percent), safety and reliability (46 percent), fairness, bias, and ethics (46 percent), and privacy (46 percent).

In terms of the advantages of AI, 54 percent of AI users believe it will lead to greater overall productivity, with only four percent pointing to lower head counts. Where generative AI is currently being used, the survey found that the most common application is programming (77 percent), using tools like GitHub Copilot or ChatGPT. Data analysis (70 percent) and customer-facing applications (65 percent) round out the top three use cases for generative AI in the enterprise right now, with additional nods to the technology's help in generating marketing (47 percent) and other forms of copy (56 percent).

The full report is available from the O'Reilly site.

Source

In September, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un met Russian President Vladimir Putin, who said during a tour he gave of a modern space launch station that Moscow would help Pyongyang build a satellite.

The following is a timeline of North Korea's space program, satellite launches and development of rocket technology.

Aug. 31, 1998: North Korea begins its space program by launching a Kwangmyongsong-1 satellite on a Paektusan rocket from the Tonghae Satellite Launching Ground near the east coast. Pyongyang declares it a success, but U.S. officials say it broke up over the Pacific Ocean.

April 5, 2009: Then-leader Kim Jong Il oversees the launch of the Kwangmyongsong-2 satellite from the Tonghae complex, but it again fails and crashes in the ocean. State media suggest that 14 North Korean soldiers were killed during the launch.

April 13, 2012: The Kwangmyongsong-3 satellite is launched from the newly completed Sohae Satellite Launching Station in the western region. Foreign media are invited to observe the launch, which once again is unsuccessful.

Dec. 12, 2012: North Korea successfully launches a second version of the Kwangmyongsong-3, putting an object in orbit. While the North claims it to be an observation satellite, it is not believed to carry a functioning transmission system.

April 2013: North Korea establishes the National Aerospace Development Administration (NADA) which purports to pursue space exploration for peaceful purposes.

Feb. 7, 2016: North Korea launches a satellite. The United States calls it a disguised test of an engine powerful enough to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). International observers say the satellite appears to be under control, but there is lingering debate over whether it sent any transmissions.

Aug. 24, 2016: Hyon Kwang-il, director of scientific research at NADA, says "our aerospace scientists will conquer space and definitely plant the flag of North Korea on the moon."

June 23, 2016: North Korea says it successfully tested an intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM), with a range of 2,000 to 3,400 miles (3,200-5,400 km).

July 4, 2017: North Korea tests an ICBM for the first time, which it says has the potential to reach the continental United States. The missile, Hwasong-14, is tested again three weeks later.

Jan. 13, 2021: During a party congress, Kim Jong Un reveals a wish list that includes developing military reconnaissance satellites.

Dec. 19, 2022: North Korea says it has conducted a "final phase" test for the development of a spy satellite at the Sohae launch station.

March 16, 2023: North Korea test-launches the Hwasong-17 ICBM, its biggest missile, which some analysts believe incorporates technology for space launch vehicles.

May 25, 2023: Construction and preparations at the Sohae launch station are moving forward at a "remarkable pace," a U.S.-based think tank says.

May 29, 2023: North Korea notifies Japan and the International Maritime Organization of a plan to launch a satellite between May 31 and June 11.

May 31, 2023: North Korea attempts to launch a reconnaissance satellite, but the rocket plunges into the sea.

July 5, 2023: South Korea's military says it retrieved the wreckage of the spy satellite from the sea, and found it had no meaningful military use as a reconnaissance platform.

Aug. 22, 2023: North Korea notifies Japan it will launch a satellite between Aug. 24 and Aug. 31 and the rocket will fly over the waters west of the Korean peninsula, the East China Sea and the Pacific.

Aug. 24, 2023: North Korea makes a second attempt to put a spy satellite in orbit, but it fails when the rocket booster experiences a problem. North Korea's spy agency says it was not a major issue and vows to try another launch in October.

Sept. 13, 2023: Putin says Moscow will help North Korea build satellites during a tour he gives to Kim Jong Un of Russia's modern space station in eastern Russia. Neither leader elaborates.

Nov. 21, 2023: North Korea notifies Japan of its plan to launch a satellite between Nov. 22 and Dec. 1, which would be the third such attempt, according to Japan's Coast Guard.

Source

When Iosif Gidiotis began his doctoral studies in educational technology this year, he was intrigued by reports that new tools powered by artificial intelligence (AI) could help him digest the literature in his discipline. With the number of papers burgeoning—across all of science, close to 3 million were published last year—an AI research assistant “sounds great,” says Gidiotis, who is studying at the KTH Royal Institute of Technology. He hoped AI could find more relevant papers than other search tools and summarize their highlights.

He experienced a bit of a letdown. When he tried AI tools such as one called Elicit, he found that only some of the returned papers were relevant, and Elicit’s summaries weren’t accurate enough to win him over. “Your instinct is to read the actual paper to verify if the summary is correct, so it doesn’t save time,” he says. (Elicit says it is continuing to improve its algorithms for its 250,000 regular users, who in a survey credited it with saving them 90 minutes a week in reading and searching, on average.)

Created in 2021 by a nonprofit research organization, Elicit is part of a growing stable of AI tools aiming to help scientists navigate the literature.

“There’s an explosion of these platforms,” says Andrea Chiarelli, who follows AI tools in publishing for the firm Research Consulting. But their developers face challenges. Among them: The generative systems that power these tools are prone to “hallucinating” false content, and many of the papers searched are behind paywalls. Developers are also looking for sustainable business models; for now, many offer introductory access for free. “It is very difficult to foresee which AI tools will prevail, and there is a level of hype, but they show great promise,” Chiarelli says.

Like ChatGPT and other large-language models (LLMs), the new tools are “trained” on large numbers of text samples, learning to recognize word relationships. These associations enable the algorithms to sum marize search results. They also identify relevant content based on context in the paper, yielding broader results than a query that uses only keywords. Building and training an LLM from scratch is too costly for all but the wealthiest organizations, says Petr Knoth, director of CORE, the world’s largest repository of open-access papers. So Elicit and others use existing open-source LLMs trained on a wide array of texts, many nonscientific.

Some of the tools go further. Elicit, for example, organizes papers by concept. A query about too much caffeine results in separate sets of papers about reducing drowsiness and impairing athletic performance. A premium version, which costs $10 per month, uses additional, in-house programming to boost accuracy.

Another tool called Scim helps draw the reader’s eye to a paper’s most relevant parts. A feature of the Semantic Reader tool created by the nonprofit Allen Institute for AI, it works like an automated ink highlighter, which users can customize to apply different colors to statements about novelty, objectives, and other themes. It provides “a quick diagnostic, a triage, about whether [a paper] is worth engaging with,” which “is very valuable,” says Eytan Adar, an informational scientist at the University of Michigan who tried out an early version before an expanded one was unveiled last month. Several of the tools also annotate summaries with excerpts from papers on which they are based, allowing users to judge the accuracy for themselves.

To try to avoid generating false responses, the Allen Institute operates Semantic Reader using a suite of LLMs, including ones trained on scientific papers. But the effectiveness of this approach is difficult to measure. “These are hard technical problems at the periphery of our understanding,” says Michael Carbin, a computer scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who helped develop an algorithm to summarize medical literature. According to Dan Weld, chief scientist at the Allen Institute’s Semantic Scholar repository of papers, “Right now, the best standard we have is to have a very educated human look at [the AI output] and carefully analyze it.” The institute has gathered feedback from more than 300 paid graduate students and thousands of volunteer testers. Quality checks revealed that applying Scim to non–computer science papers produced glitches, so the institute is currently offering Scim for only about 550,000 papers in computer science.

Other researchers emphasize that the AI tools will only reach their potential if developers and users can access papers’ full text to inform search results and analysis of content. “If we can’t access the text, then our view of the knowledge that’s captured in those texts is limited,” says Karin Verspoor, a computational linguist at the University of Melbourne.

Even Elsevier, the world’s largest scientific publisher, limits its AI tools to papers’ abstracts. In August, the commercial firm debuted an AI-assisted search feature in its Scopus database, whose listings of 93 million research publications make it one of the largest for scientists. In response to a query, its algorithms identify the most relevant abstracts and use a version of ChatGPT to provide an overall summary. (The tool restructures user queries to reduce the fabricated responses ChatGPT sometimes delivers.) Scopus AI also groups the abstracts by concept. The abstracts-only approach is consistent with the terms of Elsevier’s licensing agreements with other publishers that allow their papers’ abstracts to be listed in Scopus, says Maxim Khan, senior vice president for analytics products and data platforms at Elsevier. For now, users tell Elsevier, that approach is sufficient for “[helping] researchers in crossdisciplinary fields trying to get their head around a particular topic quickly,” he says.

The Allen Institute has taken a different approach: It negotiated agreements with more than 50 publishers that allow its developers to data mine the full text of paywalled papers. Weld says almost all the publishers have offered access at no cost because the AI drives traffic to them. Even so, licensing restrictions limit Semantic Reader users to accessing the full text of only 8 million of Semantic Scholar’s 60 million full-text papers. And Knoth says such negotiations are prohibitively time-consuming for his organization. “It can hardly be seen as a fair, level playing field,” says Knoth, whose university-funded repository works to develop tools to help scientists explore its content.

Enabling data mining on a broad scale will also require getting more authors and publishers to adopt non-PDF formats that help machines efficiently digest a paper’s contents. A White House directive in 2022 requires that papers produced with federal funding be machine readable, but agencies have yet to propose details.

Despite the challenges, computer scientists are already looking to develop more sophisticated AIs, able to glean even richer information from the literature. They want to harvest clues to enhance drug discovery and continually update systematic reviews. Research supported by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has explored systems able to automatically generate scientific hypotheses, by identifying gaps in existing knowledge as revealed by published papers.

But for now, scientists using AI tools need to maintain a healthy level of skepticism, says Hamed Zamani of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, who studies interactive information-access systems. LLMs “will definitely get better. But right now, they have a lot of limitations. They provide wrong information. So scientists should be very aware of that, and double check their output.”

Source

Altman, cofounder of the startup that last year kicked off the generative AI boom, was abruptly fired by OpenAI’s board last week, sending shockwaves through the tech world and prompting employees to make threats of a mass resignation at the company.

Across the Atlantic, the European Commission, the European Parliament and the EU Council have been hashing out the fine print of the AI Act, a sweeping set of laws that would require some companies to complete extensive risk assessments and make data available to regulators.

In recent weeks, talks have hit stumbling blocks over the extent to which companies should be allowed to self-regulate.

Brando Benifei, one of two European Parliament lawmakers leading negotiations on the laws, told Reuters: “The understandable drama around Altman being sacked from OpenAI and now joining Microsoft (MSFT.O) shows us that we cannot rely on voluntary agreements brokered by visionary leaders.

“Regulation, especially when dealing with the most powerful AI models, needs to be sound, transparent and enforceable to protect our society.”

On Monday, Reuters reported that France, Germany and Italy had reached an agreement on how AI should be regulated, a move expected to accelerate negotiations at the European level.

The three governments support "mandatory self-regulation through codes of conduct" for those using generative AI models, but some experts said this would not be enough.

Alexandra van Huffelen, Dutch minister for digitalisation, told Reuters the OpenAI saga underscored the need for strict rules.

She said: “The lack of transparency and the dependence on a few influential companies in my opinion clearly underlines the necessity of regulation.”

Meanwhile, Gary Marcus, an AI expert at New York University, wrote on social media platform X: "We can’t really trust the companies to self-regulate AI where even their own internal governance can be deeply conflicted.

"Please don't gut the EU AI Act; we need it now more than ever."

Source

Electronic warfare in the Middle East and Ukraine is affecting air travel far from the battlefields, unnerving pilots and exposing an unintended consequence of a tactic that experts say will become more common.

Planes are losing satellite signals, flights have been diverted and pilots have received false location reports or inaccurate warnings that they were flying close to terrain, according to European Union safety regulators and an internal airline memo viewed by The New York Times. The Federal Aviation Administration has also warned pilots about GPS jamming in the Middle East.

Radio frequency interference — intended to disrupt the satellite signals used by rockets, drones and other weaponry — spiked after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in early 2022 and has grown even more intense this fall in the Middle East. The interference can involve jamming satellite signals by drowning them out with noise, or spoofing them — mimicking real satellite signals to trick recipients with misleading information.

The radio interference has so far not proven to be dangerous. But aircraft systems have proved largely unable to detect GPS spoofing and correct for it, according to Opsgroup, an organization that monitors changes and risks in the aviation industry. One Embraer jet bound for Dubai nearly veered into Iranian airspace in September before the pilots figured out the plane was chasing a false signal.

“We only realized there was an issue because the autopilot started turning to the left and right, so it was obvious that something was wrong,” crew members reported to Opsgroup.

Airplanes can typically fly safely without satellite signals, and large commercial aircraft have at least six alternative navigation systems, pilots said. Business jets such as Dassault Falcons, Gulfstreams and Bombardiers appear to be more susceptible to signal spoofing, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency said.

The strain on aviation could be a harbinger of far-reaching economic and security problems as the weapons of electronic warfare proliferate. Financial markets, telecom companies, power providers, broadcasters and other industries around the world rely on satellite signals to keep accurate time. One study from Britain said that a five-day disruption of satellite signals could cost the country $6.3 billion.

Satellite signals have long been known to be susceptible to jamming and spoofing. They transmit from orbit, more than 12,000 miles above Earth, and are so weak that their power compares to that of a lightbulb.

But many experts had dismissed spoofing attacks as too complicated and expensive for all but highly-trained experts, according to Todd Humphreys, a professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Texas at Austin.

Prices have fallen quickly. Today, an enthusiastic amateur with a few hundred dollars and instructions from the internet can spoof satellite signals. Governments, too, have been more willing to overtly interfere with signals as part of their electronic warfare.

“What’s changed over the last couple of years is that spoofing has moved from theory in research articles and in laboratories to actual events in the wild,” Professor Humphreys said.

It is not always possible to distinguish jamming from spoofing, or to determine who is behind the interference. Israel said in mid-October that it had restricted GPS in the region and had warned pilots not to rely on satellite navigation systems for landing. Israel’s Defence Forces did not respond to questions.

Russian interference is well-documented. A 2019 report by the Washington-based analytical nonprofit group C4ADS showed extensive spoofing from a Russian-controlled air base in Syria. The report also indicated that, when the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, traveled to remote locations or Russian-occupied Crimea, he was flanked by mobile GPS-spoofing technology.

Russia has disrupted GPS signals to misdirect Ukrainian drones and throw precision-guided shells off their targets. Ukraine also jams Russian receivers but lacks the same level of sophistication.

Jamming is common in conflict zones. Spoofing, until recently, was rare.

“I have never seen this level of spoofing,” said Martin Drake, a technical expert for the British Airline Pilots’ Association who recently retired after 42 years as a pilot.

The interference has been felt up to 190 miles away from battlefields and “appears to go well beyond simple military mission effectiveness,” according to Eurocontrol, Europe’s primary air-traffic-control manager. The worst-affected regions include the skies above the Black Sea area from Turkey to Azerbaijan; the Mediterranean Sea extending from Cyprus to Libya; the Baltic Sea near Poland and Latvia; and the Arctic near Finland and Norway.

The increase in intensity and sophistication of such radio interference has been remarkable. Airbus said it recorded nearly 50,000 interference events on its aircraft last year, more than four times as many as the year before. This came on top of an over twentyfold jump in radio-interference events from 2017 to 2018, as recorded by a voluntary incident reporting system run by Eurocontrol. Eurocontrol said the increased jamming since 2018 was most likely meant to interfere with battlefield drones.

In the Middle East, Professor Humphrey’s research team found widespread spoofing with false signals telling pilots that their aircraft were directly above the airport in Tel Aviv when they were far away. Opsgroup said that it had received around 50 similar reports. In some cases, onboard equipment showed that planes were approaching airports in Baghdad, Cairo or Beirut, Lebanon, when they were not.

“The effects of this false signal are for the first time being seen in the last two months,” Mark Zee, the founder of Opsgroup, said from New Zealand.

The spoofing attacks, he said, have exposed a fundamental flaw in aviation electronic design, which is based on the idea that GPS signals can be trusted, and need not be verified.

That faith dates back decades. After a Korean Air Lines plane inadvertently strayed into Soviet airspace in 1983 and was shot down, the United States authorized GPS for civilian use. In 2001, the government made those signals more precise.

The world quickly became addicted to them.

The U.S. government calls them “an invisible utility.” Smartphones, cars, stock exchanges, data centers and countless industries rely on them for time, navigation or both. Similar systems exist around the world, such as Galileo in Europe, Glonass in Russia and Beidou in China.

Experts noticed the risk of jamming in 2012, when a ground-based signal booster failed at Newark Liberty International Airport. The source of the problem, it turned out, was a driver who had parked his company-issued Ford truck close to the airport and used a GPS jammer to hide his whereabouts from his employer.

Since then, truck drivers who want to work longer hours, Pokémon Go players who want to cheat and even car thieves who want to disable a car’s navigation system have used small, inexpensive jammers that have created unintended disruptions. Some signal receivers now come equipped with technology to counteract jammers.

Spoofing is harder to handle because the signal appears legitimate. Only the European navigation satellite system, Galileo, incorporates an authentication system that can provide confidence that a signal is from its satellites. Galileo, which currently is the most accurate and precise navigation satellite system, plans to introduce an even stronger level of authentication, according to a spokesperson for the European Commission.

But even Galileo’s authentication cannot protect against one of the most dreaded types of spoofing, known as “meaconing.” In a meaconing attack, a spoofer would record satellite signals, and then rebroadcast them with an amplification or a delay. Experts have not publicly confirmed any meaconing attacks in the Middle East.

Opsgroup said that the latest events should prompt manufacturers to re-examine the integration of satellite signals in aircraft electronics, known as avionics, without a safeguard that can identify false signals.

“It will take some time for manufacturers to catch up,” Mr. Zee said.

Source

If they had been the plot of a science fiction movie, or an episode of “Succession,” the events at OpenAI last weekend would have seemed a little over-the-top.

A secret board coup! Fears of killer A.I.! A star C.E.O., betrayed by his chief scientist! A middle-of-the-night staff revolt that threatens to change the balance of global tech power!

If you haven’t been paying attention to all the twists and turns in the saga, that’s OK. It’s been a confusing ride, with lots of complex jargon and hard-to-follow details.

But it’s an important story, even if you’re not particularly interested in A.I. If you’ve ever used ChatGPT or drawn a picture with DALL-E 3, or if you care about whether powerful A.I. systems might someday threaten human survival, all of that is wrapped up in the drama at OpenAI, the country’s most prominent maker of artificial intelligence.

Here’s what you need to know:

Why did this happen?

OpenAI’s board fired its chief executive, Sam Altman, in a surprise on Friday. The board’s explanation — that Altman had not been completely candid with them — was vague and opaque.

We still don’t know exactly what happened between Altman and the board. But OpenAI’s unusual governance structure — it is run by a nonprofit board that controls a for-profit subsidiary and can vote to replace its leaders — allowed the board to fire Altman without explaining itself.

What was the coup about?

The coup was led by Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI’s chief scientist, who had butted heads with Altman. Sutskever wants the company to prioritize safety and was worried that Altman was more focused on growth.

Sutskever is among a faction of A.I. experts who are fearful that A.I. may soon surpass human abilities and become a threat to our survival. Several of OpenAI’s board members have ties to effective altruism, a philosophical movement that has made preventing these threats a top priority. Altman has concerns about A.I. risks, too. But he has also expressed optimism that A.I. will be good for society, and a desire to make progress more quickly. That may have put him at odds with the safety-minded board members, whose job is to see that powerful A.I. is developed responsibly.

What’s happened since the coup?

Over the weekend, it looked as though Altman might return to OpenAI, under the condition that major changes were made to the board. That didn’t happen. Instead, late on Sunday night, the board affirmed its decision, writing in a memo to employees that Altman’s “behavior and lack of transparency in his interactions with the board undermined the board’s ability to effectively supervise the company in the manner it was mandated to do.”

The board then appointed Emmett Shear — the former chief executive of Twitch, a livestreaming company — to be OpenAI’s second interim C.E.O. in just a few days. (Mira Murati, the chief technology officer, had been given the job, only to lose it after signaling her support for Altman.)

In response, Microsoft — OpenAI’s biggest investor and a major strategic partner — offered to give Altman and his top lieutenant, Greg Brockman, a job running a new A.I. lab. Nearly all of OpenAI’s roughly 770 employees signed a letter threatening to quit and go work for the new Microsoft team, unless the start-up’s board resigned and brought back Altman and Brockman.

In another surprise twist, Sutskever then had second thoughts. He wrote in a post on X on Monday that he deeply regretted having taken part in the ouster and that he had “never intended to harm OpenAI.” He also signed the letter pledging to follow Altman and Brockman to Microsoft unless the board reversed its decision.

That sounds messy! But why does this matter to the rest of us?

Corporate infighting is not new. But what makes the OpenAI story stand out is the stakes. OpenAI is no ordinary company. It built ChatGPT, one of the fastest-growing tech products of all time, and it employs many of the top A.I. researchers.

The company is also unusually ambitious and saw its role as building a digital superintelligence that would eventually become more powerful than humans. In addition, Altman was a well-liked leader and a figurehead for the A.I. industry, making the board’s decision to oust him even more of a mystery.

In a larger sense, what’s happening at OpenAI is a proxy for one of the biggest fights in the global economy today: how to control increasingly powerful A.I. tools, and whether large companies can be trusted to develop them responsibly.

Source