Business Insider
중도 성향
IT/기술
AI is reducing hours of work to minutes. Some employees say they're just as busy.
Business Insider asked six tech workers which task AI is saving them the most time on. The gains aren't always reducing workloads.
IT/기술 · "ALWAYS" · 총 43건
필터 보기현재 지수
50.3
0 = 부정 우세
50 = 중립
100 = 긍정 우세
최근 7일 기준 87,585건을 분석한 결과, 뉴스 심리지수는 50.2(균형)입니다. 긍정 4,284건(4.9%)·중립 81,160건(92.7%)·부정 2,141건(2.4%)이며, 중립 비중이 뚜렷하게 높습니다. 성향 지수는 종합 14.8(중도 균형)입니다.
Business Insider asked six tech workers which task AI is saving them the most time on. The gains aren't always reducing workloads.
We are designed to smell each other – but the custom-made soulmates of AI are frictionless, and always available. What if we fall out of love with our own kind?
We’re always testing out new products here The Verge, which presents a bit of a problem for our inventory closet in New York City. It’s literally overflowing with gadgets, new and old, so we’re restoring order by giving some of it away to one lucky person. We’ve stuffed over $800 worth of tech into a […]
From app-controlled security to electronic shifting and radar alerts, Segway’s Myon may have more tech than you need. That’s not always a bad thing.
Some people rarely lose things. Wallets are always exactly where they’re supposed to be, keys never go missing, and remotes never slip between the couch cushions. And then there’s the rest of us — the folks who can’t ever seem to find the thing that was right there a few seconds ago. For us, Bluetooth […]
Always-on agent promises to keep work moving, provided you trust it with practically everything
The writer and anti-bullying activist is on social media, but to protect her nervous system, she prefers not to be alerted.
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang is putting South Korea's physical AI potential in the spotlight, with robotics set to top the agenda during his planned visit to Seoul from Thursday. "I think that robotics is very important to Korea, and I hope to be able to contribute to robotics in Korea," Huang said during Nvidia's "Korea Partner Night," held for the first time on the sidelines of the Computex event in Taiwan on Tuesday. "We would always consider investments in Korea, (it has) such a great ecosystem,
Microsoft just kicked off Build 2026 with a keynote from CEO Satya Nadella and other company leaders. As expected, it was filled with announcements, ranging from new Surface hardware to an always-on personal assistant and updates across Microsoft's in-house AI models. If you didn't watch the event live, you can catch up on all the […]
From a draft by Stanford law professor Julian Nyarko and others: We conducted a blinded evaluation of short-answer tutoring in… The post Eventually, the Steam Drill Always Wins: "Law Professors Prefer AI Over Peer Answers" appeared first on Reason.com.
Much like Google, Microsoft is launching its own version of OpenClaw. Microsoft Scout is an always-on assistant that integrates into Microsoft 365 apps like Outlook, OneDrive, and Microsoft Teams, allowing businesses to assign a virtual assistant to employees to help with organizing calendars, expense reporting, email drafts, and much more. Unlike Copilot that lives inside […]
It’s easy to understand why so many graduates are booing commencement speakers who tell them how great AI is. They face a brutal job market, with unemployment for recent college graduates nearing recession levels, and AI is often cited as the reason they can’t find jobs or have to drastically reassess their career plans.I have a message for the class of 2026: AI is not ruining your job prospects, at least not yet. A better explanation for the tough job market may be the prevalence of WFH, not the rise of AI.131463654Two new studies, one from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and one from the London School of Economics, look at the recent rise in unemployment among young workers. The authors of the LSE study looked at 243 million new hires and 407 million online job postings from 2017 to 2025 in the US, UK, Australia and Canada. They observed a notable decline since 2022 in the hiring of new graduates. AI was presumed to be the reason, since the falloff tends to be in the sort of industries that are adopting AI.But these are also the same kinds of jobs — reliant on computers, knowledge-intensive, white-collar — that are most amenable to working from home. When they controlled for WFH, the authors found that the impact of AI on hiring was negligible.The study postulates that where WFH is more common, managing junior staff is more expensive. At the same time, young staffers who receive less training may be less productive than they would be otherwise, even as they mature and demand more pay. So the cost of WFH to young graduates is not just a harder job market — it also makes it harder for young employees to get good training, supervision and mentorship, a point also made by the New York Fed study.WFH has always had a superficial appeal. At first, it seems easier and often cheaper for both employers and employees; companies can pay less if they offer more flexibility, and many staffers have commitments that keep them at home. In the long term, however, both management and workers pay a price in terms of lost training and career development of younger employees.This could get even worse as AI is more widely adopted. New hires recently out of college who work on their own may figure out how to do specific tasks (perhaps with AI assistance), but they won’t learn much about how to manage office politics, charm clients or build networks. All these skills will be even more valuable in an AI job market, and none can be gained without coming into the office and observing senior colleagues.The new research doesn’t argue that AI will have no impact on hiring in the future, or that it is currently affecting hiring decisions. It’s also worth noting that many firms are still hiring — just not as much as before. There are a lot of factors that go into the health of the labor market, and if the economy worsens, the combination of AI and WFH could make it even harder for young graduates.What does seem clear is that AI is becoming a convenient villain for a lot of complaints people have about the economy. Tech executives aren’t helping by regularly declaring that AI can replace a lot of jobs. More likely, they are using AI as an excuse when they are letting people go for financial reasons. In the case of WFH, it may be easier to blame AI than to ask reluctant staff to come into the office.I’ve seen this reluctance firsthand: A few years ago I met middle-aged media executive who told me how much she loved working from home (or, often in her case, from a resort in Mexico). When I asked her about junior staffers missing out on mentoring and on-the-job training, she admitted she never would have succeeded if senior people weren’t in the office when she was coming up. But she didn’t seem too bothered by it, either.I’ve never been asked to give a commencement speech, but if for some reason I were, this would be my advice: Find a company where everyone likes going to work. Then try to get a job there — and if you do, go into the office every day.
Opera makers have always engaged with the latest inventions while also preserving historic crafts. I believe it’s possible to look both forwards and backwards in this fast-evolving landscape The disquiet and distrust surrounding artificial intelligence among artists and creatives remain real and consequential, and the language used by leading arts commentators is often apocalyptic: AI will decimate the arts, it is evil, it is the devil. Like many emerging technologies, AI has been driven by the corporations at the forefront of its creation. Introduced to the public at a rapid rate and continuously evolving, machine learning has become closely entwined with fear, antipathy and foreboding. At the same time, its powers and possibilities are expanding exponentially, becoming embedded in almost every aspect of human activity. The upcoming RBO/SHIFT festival at the Royal Opera House aims to interrogate all sides of this fast-evolving landscape to enable artists, performers, creatives and audiences to think deeply and widely about where we are now, and where we may be tomorrow. Machine learning represents a seismic shift, both in society and in the arts, and we need storytellers, artists, teachers and thinkers in this space to help determine the direction of that shift and help us navigate this unfamiliar territory. Continue reading...
Artificial intelligence is getting expensive — and companies are starting to rethink their embrace of the disruptive technology. Playing by a well-worn Silicon Valley playbook, AI companies charged rock-bottom prices to hook customers after ChatGPT burst onto the scene. Kevin Simback of startup incubator Delphi Labs calls it the era of “subsidised intelligence” — meaning investors were basically footing the bill so companies could offer AI on the cheap. “But the tides are beginning to turn,” Simback warned and an era where the big AI companies actually need to make money has begun — with leaders OpenAI and Anthropic looking to go public and attract main street investors later this year. Prices are rising across the board, and one big reason is AI agents. Unlike a chatbot that just answers questions, agents actually do things — book appointments, write code, manage files. And they’re expensive to run, because one task can spin up dozens of agents all working at once, each racking up charges. Those charges are measured in tokens — the basic unit AI companies use to bill customers. A single agent-powered task can burn through dozens of times’ more tokens than a simple chat message. Meanwhile, the computer chips and data centres needed to power all this AI can’t keep up with demand, creating computing shortages and adding further uncertainty to the nascent industry. “Especially in developer circles, the cost to use AI for things like coding has grown exponentially,” said Mark Barton of tech consultancy Omniux. “All the costs are really starting to skyrocket.” Some companies have been so eager to use AI that they’ve gone overboard in a usage binge called “tokenmaxxing”. “In some cases, people are seeing the cost of tokens exceed the cost of the employee within a month or two of use, just because they’re using it too much,” says analyst Jack Gold of J.Gold Associates. Smarter spending Even Meta — which earlier this year encouraged employees to use as many tokens as possible as a measure of productivity — has had second thoughts. “Nobody should be using AI tools just for the sake of using them,” chief technology officer Andrew Bosworth wrote in a memo to staff, reported by the Wall Street Journal. Uber’s chief operating officer this week went a step further, raising eyebrows by saying all this AI spending was showing no noticeable increase in productivity. To cut costs, some companies are switching to free, open-source AI models that anyone can download — not as powerful as ChatGPT or Anthropic’s Claude, but good enough for many tasks. Others are moving to smaller, more specialised models built for specific industries like real estate or finance, rather than giant general-purpose ones. And some are simply breaking big AI tasks into smaller steps, handing each piece to the cheapest model that can handle it. The price difference can be dramatic. “The big large monolithic model, it’s $15 per million tokens, but you can get that down to like five cents if you use the smaller mini model,” says Adrian Balfour of consultancy Enverso. All of this points to AI becoming more like a commodity — where the specific model matters less than finding the right one at the right price. But don’t count out the big players and their state-of-the-art models just yet. “The most advanced users” will always be willing to pay for the best, says John Belton, a portfolio manager at Gabelli Funds. “It’s a growing pie.”
Artificial intelligence is getting expensive — and companies are starting to rethink their embrace of the disruptive technology. Playing by a well-worn Silicon Valley playbook, AI companies charged rock-bottom prices to hook customers after ChatGPT burst onto the scene. Kevin Simback of startup incubator Delphi Labs calls it the era of “subsidised intelligence” — meaning investors were basically footing the bill so companies could offer AI on the cheap. “But the tides are beginning to turn,” Simback warned and an era where the big AI companies actually need to make money has begun — with leaders OpenAI and Anthropic looking to go public and attract main street investors later this year. Prices are rising across the board, and one big reason is AI agents. Unlike a chatbot that just answers questions, agents actually do things — book appointments, write code, manage files. And they’re expensive to run, because one task can spin up dozens of agents all working at once, each racking up charges. Those charges are measured in tokens — the basic unit AI companies use to bill customers. A single agent-powered task can burn through dozens of times’ more tokens than a simple chat message. Meanwhile, the computer chips and data centres needed to power all this AI can’t keep up with demand, creating computing shortages and adding further uncertainty to the nascent industry. “Especially in developer circles, the cost to use AI for things like coding has grown exponentially,” said Mark Barton of tech consultancy Omniux. “All the costs are really starting to skyrocket.” Some companies have been so eager to use AI that they’ve gone overboard in a usage binge called “tokenmaxxing”. “In some cases, people are seeing the cost of tokens exceed the cost of the employee within a month or two of use, just because they’re using it too much,” says analyst Jack Gold of J.Gold Associates. Smarter spending Even Meta — which earlier this year encouraged employees to use as many tokens as possible as a measure of productivity — has had second thoughts. “Nobody should be using AI tools just for the sake of using them,” chief technology officer Andrew Bosworth wrote in a memo to staff, reported by the Wall Street Journal. Uber’s chief operating officer this week went a step further, raising eyebrows by saying all this AI spending was showing no noticeable increase in productivity. To cut costs, some companies are switching to free, open-source AI models that anyone can download — not as powerful as ChatGPT or Anthropic’s Claude, but good enough for many tasks. Others are moving to smaller, more specialised models built for specific industries like real estate or finance, rather than giant general-purpose ones. And some are simply breaking big AI tasks into smaller steps, handing each piece to the cheapest model that can handle it. The price difference can be dramatic. “The big large monolithic model, it’s $15 per million tokens, but you can get that down to like five cents if you use the smaller mini model,” says Adrian Balfour of consultancy Enverso. All of this points to AI becoming more like a commodity — where the specific model matters less than finding the right one at the right price. But don’t count out the big players and their state-of-the-art models just yet. “The most advanced users” will always be willing to pay for the best, says John Belton, a portfolio manager at Gabelli Funds. “It’s a growing pie.”
The familiar sights gave the Prospect Lefferts Gardens native and Poly Prep Country Day School alumnus reminders of home that he always cherishes.
Comments
I live in a part of Los Angeles where I feel safer bringing pepper spray on walks. The problem is, I don't always remember to bring it with me, and it's not legal to carry it everywhere I go. Pebblebee's $59.99 Halo Bluetooth tracker surprised me by being a suitable replacement because it doubles as […]
FOR the last three years since ChatGPT was introduced, prominent writers, editors and litterateurs have been openly hostile to the idea of AI being able to write fiction, poetry or prose — indeed, any kind of literature. The tech companies that introduced all these LLMs, imagining ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, and Copilot as writing aids, study buddies, collaborators and co-authors, have thrown a nuclear bomb into the literary world, and most of its inhabitants are still in a crouch position, bracing for an impact that detonated back in 2022. But the literary world must call a truce because AI is here to stay. Moreover, any writer who teaches writing, any literary editor or agent who evaluates submissions, any practitioner called upon to judge a literary competition must become AI literate; it’s an unavoidable skill that’s simply part of the job from now on. Last week, the Commonwealth Writing Prize and Granta published five regional short story winners, one of which, Jamir Nazar’s ‘A Serpent in the Grove’, was singled out as possibly AI-generated. It raised a furore on social media but it didn’t surprise me at all. I’ve graded hundreds of student essays, judged creative writing capstones and a major Pakistani literary prize in the last year. So much is now written with the help of AI that I feel overwhelmed. I’ve been using the last two years to learn exactly how AI writes — not just its processes, but its style and its voice. I’ve studied it as much as I would study any human author, looking for how it handles dialogue, description, character and plot. Yet if I’d stuck my head in the sand and refused to touch AI for the sake of artistic integrity, I would be letting down all those people who trust my judgement and expertise. Students are addicted to AI not because they want to cheat, but because they’re terrified of looking stupid or inadequate. I spent hours tinkering with AI, asking it to write things in a Pakistani context: a synopsis for a Harry Potter book set in Lahore; descriptions of Karachi. AI churned out showy, contrived prose that looks like it’s doing a lot without actually saying anything meaningful. It blathered inanities about Karachi being a “city that remembers” and Pakistani women who “sauntered through the bazaar as if their bodies bore the weight of generations of family secrets”. AI wrote verbal pyrotechnics with no emotional connection to the city that I love. It’s too much of a temptation to expect people, especially students, not to use AI to write. Pakistan is a former British colony with a postcolonial hangover about the English language, even though few of us speak it fluently and even fewer can write it well. Yet the language of instruction in top Pakistani schools and universities has remained and always will be English. Students are addicted to AI not because they want to cheat, but because they’re terrified of looking stupid or inadequate. And the LLMs are ever-present to capitalise on that fear. I have to keep telling my students: AI is here not to help you, but to make money off you. Also, there will never be a foolproof AI-detection tool. AI will keep learning more from every person that asks it to help them write a story; AI ‘detectors’ will offer you an answer based on their own algorithms and biases. Differentiating AI writing from human writing requires human discernment, the same faculty we use to know when writing is sublime or terrible. It requires instinct, experience and a close look at the person’s work overall to see if the story is a representation of their usual style — call it the new due diligence in a post-AI world. The culprit in the Commonwealth Writers debacle was not racism or some kind of Western pandering to the postcolonial writer, but sheer ignorance on the part of judges. And underneath that ignorance lies a wilful denial about just how seismic the AI shift is. Everyone who must evaluate writing professionally is scared of the threat that AI poses to the literary arts and the earnings of the publishing industry. They’re terrified of the idea that everyone else is already so far ahead they may never be able to catch up. AI has already learned to mimic cultural inflections. It will talk about any part of the world — Guyana, South Korea, Bosnia — with pompous certainty and try to dazzle you with metaphorically bizarre surface-level descriptors or overwhelm you with atmosphere so you don’t realise there’s actually no plot or insight, no empathy, none of the beauty that makes writing an art as well as a practice. Personally, I resent the tech bros who have turned my relationship with writing from practitioner to policewoman, turning a jaundiced eye to everyone’s writing and suspecting the worst. AI is now influencing young people learning how to write to the extent that even my best students have started to sound like AI. I know that AI recognises patterns and produces only a facsimile of good writing, much like the proverbial broken clock that’s right twice a day. The practice of writing words to connect with a reader, communicate ideas and tell a story is a human endeavour that AI will never be able to match. Fear won’t stop me from looking it straight in the AI and declaring, “You have no power over me.” I urge everyone else — writers, teachers, judges and editors — to do the same. The writer currently teaches Expository Writing at AKUFAS. Published in Dawn, May 30th, 2026
Microchip development has always been a race to build smaller and smaller transistors – the fundamental components of chip circuits. Now China’s Huawei Technologies wants to change the game entirely. Faced with US tech export restrictions that block its access to the world’s most advanced chipmaking machinery, Huawei is proposing a fundamental shift in semiconductor progress: stop obsessing over how small the transistors are and start focusing on how fast data moves through the system. It is a...