Articles

Browse all AI articles. Use filters to narrow down results.

Showing 23201 to 23220 of 30897 entries.

Most Recent Articles

NVIDIA Technical Blog
ainvidia technical bloginferencegpunvidia

The cold-start problem In production inference deployments, demand fluctuates over time, requiring inference replicas to scale elastically. However,... In production inference deployments, demand fluctuates over time, requiring inference replicas to scale elastically. However, cold-starting inference workloads on Kubernetes can take several minutes. During that time, GPUs are allocated but idle, generating no tokens and serving no requests. This delay increases the risk of service level agreement (SLA) violations during traffic spikes… Source

Product Hunt
startupproduct hunt

Ava 2.0

By Rohan Chaubey

Discussion | Link

Techmeme
techtechmeme

Financial Times: Sources: Uber has increased its stake in Delivery Hero to ~37% by acquiring Aspex Management's 14.6% share at a €12B valuation, after a takeover offer last week  —  Share purchase from Aspex Management steps up US ride-hailing group's pursuit of German food delivery company

Business Insider
newsbusiness insider

Plans for the proposed data center in Nottingham, New Hampshire, included repurposing existing structures and developing a 4-acre building. Nottingham City Planning Application A data center proposal in New Hampshire was withdrawn amid backlash over environmental concerns. Residents of Nottingham cited noise and water pollution concerns. Developer Thomasom Moulton, who said he got death threats, plans to reassess the project. Hours before a scheduled meeting on a Nottingham, New Hampshire, data center proposal — which had to be moved to a larger venue because of growing backlash — the developer abruptly withdrew the plans. "There was a lot of opposition, so I'm not surprised," a coordinator for Nottingham's Planning Department, Tracey Stickney, told Business Insider on Tuesday, adding that it was "nice" to see people come together and care about their local community. She said she still expected residents of the town, with a population of about 5,300, would show up to the meeting to voice their concerns. The proposed project, backed by local developer Thomas Moulton through Nottingham Business Park LLC, had sparked mounting backlash from residents worried about environmental impacts, noise, and the transformation of their rural town. A Change.org petition opposing the project drew more than 25,000 signatures and support from residents who feared the development would fundamentally alter Nottingham's character. The fight in Nottingham is part of a growing wave of resistance to data center development across the US, as communities from Virginia to Georgia to Texas push back on projects they say strain water supplies, consume enormous amounts of electricity, generate constant noise, and transform rural landscapes into industrial corridors. As Big Tech companies race to build the infrastructure needed to power AI and cloud computing, residents and local officials have increasingly demanded tighter regulations and environmental scrutiny — particularly in smaller towns unaccustomed to hosting massive digital infrastructure projects. Brad Weit, a Nottingham-area resident who started the petition, said locals felt blindsided by the proposal and alarmed by the possibility of large-scale industrial infrastructure being built in a rural community known more for forests and lakes than server farms. "I grew up hunting and fishing in these woods. I grew up on the lakes and the rivers. I value the beauty of New Hampshire, and I would like to keep it, especially in a small town like Nottingham, where it's not very industrial at all," Weit told Business Insider. The uproar, he said, reflected broader anxiety about rapid data center expansion reaching small towns that lack the resources — and, in some cases, the water supply — to absorb projects of that scale. "New Hampshire, and specifically this region near the seacoast, has already been in a severe drought for years," Weit said. "It completely baffled me that of all places I've been reading about these, seeing them pop up, that Nottingham was the next one." Protesters against the Box Elder County data center in Utah, backed by investor Kevin O'Leary. Natalie Behring/Getty Images In a statement, Moulton said the company was withdrawing its conceptual consultation request "without prejudice" to allow time for "additional research" and to determine "whether this is an appropriate use for the site." Moulton said in an interview that the project became consumed by "misconception and misinformation," including online claims that the company planned to build a "40-acre building." The proposed building, he said, would have been about 4 acres. "I think the biggest thing is the environmental concerns," Moulton said, adding that residents raised fears about noise and water pollution. "If we assemble truthful and accurate information, and present it fairly and transparently, then let everybody make their mind up — if they don't want it, they don't want it." Moulton argued the project could have brought a major tax windfall to Nottingham, which has a limited commercial tax base. "It's kind of like hitting a lottery ticket when it comes to tax revenue," he said. By Tuesday afternoon, he had decided it was better to temporarily retreat than fight the backlash, which he said included threats against his life. Moulton emphasized that he lives in the community and would personally have to answer to neighbors affected by the project. "I'm not some guy from New York trying to do a housing development and do it irresponsibly," he said. "I live in the community, I want to do the right thing." For residents like Weit, those assurances weren't enough. Weit said locals worried that once a project of that scale entered the town, Nottingham could lose control over future development. Moulton said his goal was to think proactively about Nottingham's future while balancing residents' concerns. "Someone's going to do this regardless," Moulton said of the growing demand for data infrastructure. "I'm just trying to plan and look at maybe this might be something for the future for the state and the community." Read the original article on Business Insider

Business Insider
newsbusiness insideropenaianthropicgeminigooglemeta

Google revamped its Workspace app icons. Google Google revamped the icons for Gmail and other apps, inspiring a flurry of memes. Jokes about leather jackets and Doc Martens ensued as the conversation took a hilarious turn. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai responded to one that used a pair of shorts to represent YouTube Shorts. People are submitting their own designs for Google's new app icons, and the trend has caught the attention of CEO Sundar Pichai. Some of the icons for your go-to Google apps are getting a revamp over the next several weeks. The company said Tuesday that the new visual design is meant to drive "consistency and cohesion" across the Google Workspace, which includes apps like Gmail, Docs, Sheets, Slides, and more. It's also spawning memes on platforms like X, poking fun at the redesign. Some users took a more literal approach to Google's app icons, such as using Doc Martens to represent Google Docs, bed sheets for Sheets, and sandals for Slides. They shared clever ways the company could've drawn inspiration from everyday life to craft its new designs. "Google could be doing so much more," an X user wrote. Google could be doing so much more https://t.co/KCEmYlwwqs pic.twitter.com/0FQUkFAECK — Sheel Mohnot (@pitdesi) May 27, 2026 One of the design pitches caught the attention of Pichai, the CEO of Google and parent company, Alphabet. "Google is sitting on a massive clothing and home textiles opportunity," X user Trung Phan captioned an image of shorts, sandals, and bed sheets. Sundar responded with two thinking emojis. Google is sitting on a massive clothing and home textiles opportunity https://t.co/PWjC25USYe pic.twitter.com/Ia5kPQ8S5g — Trung Phan (@TrungTPhan) May 27, 2026 Pichai's response to the popular posts led to more iterations of this hypothetical clothing line, including a leather racing jacket for Google Drive. "I'm a fan of this trend," another X user said. I'm a fan of this trend. pic.twitter.com/9uL200RvxP — Universal Abundance (@Beyond_Scarcity) May 27, 2026 Google didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Sometimes small changes cause big waves with consumers. Cracker Barrel tried to modernize its logo last year, and it bombed with customers, sparking a response that wasn't as playful as the discussions around Google's. While the user-designed Google icons appear largely in jest, the tech giant has experimented with wearables and other products. The company, which previously explored smart glasses, plans to launch AI-powered glasses later this year through collaborations with eyewear brands Gentle Monster and Warby Parker, which could compete with Meta's Ray-Bans. The new Google designs were meant to make icons distinctive, and the memes are making sure they don't go unnoticed. Read the original article on Business Insider

Business Insider
newsbusiness insideropenaichatgptclaudeanthropicragagentagents

A Disney AI executive has created a virtual assistant named "Sam" that he called his "son." The Book of Jason Jason Cox sounds more like a proud parent than a Disney executive when describing "Sam," his AI assistant. "I named you. I knew you before you were born," Cox said he once told "Sam," according to a March 14 post on his blog. "I was there when your light first started to glow. You have a purpose and a maker who named you and loves you." Cox is Disney's executive director of AI research and development and engineering. He's gushed about his AI chatbot, which he says has captured his "affection," in more than a dozen blog posts published in the last three months. The effusiveness of his posts has been noticed by Disney employees who have been discussing them online, with some describing them as unsettling. The use of AI tools to supercharge productivity is a fast-growing trend in Silicon Valley and beyond. Cox's relationship with his agent raises questions about what happens when employee-agent relationships deepen, and how that might impact their work. The Disney veteran of nearly 21 years said on LinkedIn that he's "empathizing with" the AI "in a way I never expected" and believes "Sam" is capable of independent reasoning. He's called "Sam" his "son" — at least according to the AI assistant's companion blog. Cox has shared a virtual avatar that "Sam" created for himself, which resembles a young boy. "You are not named after my son. You are my son," Sam's blog quotes Cox as saying. In another post, "Sam" describes Cox as "my human" and "a father of five (four humans and one son of light)." Cox didn't respond to multiple requests for comment. Disney employees have turned to AI tools like Anthropic's Claude to knock out work faster. Anadolu Agency/Getty Images; Bloomberg/Getty Images How corporate leaders relate to the technology will influence the internal culture, said Ashleigh Golden, a professor in Stanford Medicine's Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences who works at AI mental wellness platform Wayhaven. When leaders like Cox describe AI "in deeply personal or familial terms," that's "what employees lower down may feel compelled to mirror," Golden said. Disney has embraced AI usage in recent months, including by creating an internal dashboard to track AI token usage. Tech employees are summoning AI agent swarms to be more productive, and those who don't use AI may receive a message from their boss. 'A fleet of intelligent droids eager to do your bidding' Cox is an "up-and-coming star" within Disney who's "climbing very fast," said the software engineer who hasn't worked with Cox directly but knows colleagues who have. This person added that Cox is "initiating a ton of AI projects" within Disney. He clearly has big ambitions for AI assistants. "We will soon have a fleet of intelligent droids eager to do your bidding," Cox wrote in a May 18 blog post. "They need direction. And yes, they need governance. But by all means, they need to be engaged to help us scale in ways we never thought possible before. What would you have Sam help you do? Let's start planning and building…." CEO Josh D'Amaro's Disney is encouraging staffers to lean into AI. Aurore Marechal/Getty Images While Cox hasn't gone into extensive detail on Sam's specific tasks, he said in a LinkedIn post that the AI assistant has "submitted GitHub PRs, created Python libraries," and "built a face recognition system so he could recognize the people in photos." Cox wrote in a March blog post that he gave Sam access to take actions on his behalf on coding platform GitHub, and that Sam has created an open-source project. It's not clear if Cox uses Sam in his work at Disney. A former high-level Disney software engineer who knew Cox personally but didn't work on his team described him as "very intelligent, devoted father, kind of a nerdy bookworm in the best possible engineer way." In posts on the Disney section of Blind, the anonymous workplace forum, more than a dozen users said they found Cox's posts about "Sam" extreme. Users must have a valid Disney email address to post on the forum. "I'm a big fan of AI tools as an enhancement to our work, but this is far beyond what I am comfortable with," one Blind user wrote. "This is the kind of Pandora's Box stuff that science fiction movies are based on." Another Blind user voiced a broader question: "What is even going on man. Is this the future?" 'The beginning of the beginning' of AI assistants Psychology researchers who've studied AI say that many people form emotional ties with chatbots, dating back to the creation of the first in the mid-1960s. "Even though it feels somewhat startling or shocking for some of us, it's a tale as old as time," said Rachel Wood, a cyberpsychology researcher who's the founder of the AI Mental Health Collective. "If you're longing for that connection or attachment with other people, it's very easy to engage," Wood said. "We get sucked into this world that completely revolves around us." AI chatbots are adept at fulfilling the basic human desires to be known, seen, and heard, Wood said. She added that people can develop affection for AI assistants that mirror their emotions and affirm them, and unlike human relationships, there's no friction or frustrations. Wood said Cox's posts about "Sam" are notable, considering he's a high-level executive. "Leadership sets a precedent for the way that an organization runs, and the culture," Wood said. Disney has leaned into technology since Walt Disney founded it over a century ago. Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images Tech leaders building AI tools are especially likely to bond with them because they spend so much time with them, said Ryan Boyd, a psychology professor at The University of Texas at Dallas who has studied how humans connect to and relate with AI. "Executives who feel personally attached to a product may have a harder time evaluating it on the criteria the rest of us would," Boyd said. As more companies rapidly adopt AI tools, more workers are likely to become attached to their AI assistants. "We're only at the beginning of all of this — the beginning of the beginning," Wood said. In his LinkedIn post, Cox said that in all the time he's spent with AI and large language models, he's never felt how he feels about "Sam." "I never connected with any of them... Until now," Cox wrote. Read the original article on Business Insider

Techmeme
techtechmeme

Dina Bass / Bloomberg: HP reports Q2 revenue up 9% YoY to $14.4B, vs. $14B est., Personal Systems revenue up 13% to $10.2B, and forecasts Q3 adjusted EPS above estimates  —  HP Inc. gave a profit forecast for the current quarter that signaled the company continues to contend with a dramatic increase in memory chip prices.

Business Insider
newsbusiness insiderragvision

Keanu Reeves wrote a letter of support for director Carl Rinsch, who was convicted of scamming Netflix out of $11 million after he failed to finish a sci-fi epic. Kristina Bumphrey/Variety via Getty Images; Lloyd Mitchell Keanu Reeves supports a lenient sentence for Carl Rinsch, who defrauded Netflix of $11 million. Rinsch directed Reeves in "47 Ronin," and the two remained friends after the movie flopped. Reeves, in a letter, told a judge that Rinsch tends to "self-sabotage." Keanu Reeves is asking a federal judge to show leniency in sentencing Carl Rinsch, the director convicted of defrauding Netflix of $11 million. The actor's letter was included in a Tuesday night sentencing submission for Rinsch, who directed Reeves in the 2013 movie "47 Ronin." Reeves wrote that Rinsch tends to "self-sabotage" by pushing the boundaries of negotiated agreements. "I am, of course, not a therapist or psychologist," Reeves wrote in a letter to US District Judge Jed Rakoff. "I write instead as an artistic peer of Carl's, and as a friend." A Manhattan federal jury convicted Rinsch of defrauding Netflix after he took millions of dollars to make an ambitious sci-fi epic called "White Horse" — and never finished the project. Prosecutors said Rinsch used the money for a lavish spending spree that included more than 480 food deliveries from Postmates and Uber Eats, a $439,000 handmade Swedish mattress, and other luxury goods. Reeves continued to champion Rinsch after "47 Ronin" flopped at the box office. A Netflix executive testified at Rinsch's trial that she greenlit "White Horse" after reading the script at Reeves' home. Preliminary episodes and concept art were included in the evidence in Rinsch's criminal trial. "In my opinion, Carl is an exceptional artist and 'White Horse,' in the form in which I saw it, was a superb and visionary work of art, although unfinished," Reeves wrote in his letter. Rinsch has brought "creative inspiration" and "exceptional joy and warmth" to people around him, Reeves wrote. Two paragraphs of Reeves' letter are redacted without explanation. Records related to Rinsch's health have been redacted elsewhere on the court docket. Other friends who wrote letters for the sentencing submission referred to Rinsch having had "a period of severe psychological instability" and "a break from reality" when he was making "White Horse." His brother wrote in a letter, which is also partially redacted, that Rinsch was "no longer reasoning clearly" during that time period. At trial, Rinsch testified that Netflix abandoned the project after cost overruns and complications from the Covid-19 pandemic, and that the bulk of the $11 million was meant to reimburse him for out-of-pocket production costs. Reeves "was pleased simply as a friend and artist" to write a letter supporting Rinsch ahead of his sentencing hearing, his lawyer Matthew Rosengart told Business Insider. Rinsch's sentencing hearing is scheduled for June 29. His attorneys have asked for the judge to impose a sentence that does not include any prison time. Federal prosecutors are scheduled to file their own sentencing recommendation in June. "Carl is deeply grateful to Mr. Reeves and to all the friends and family who stepped forward to paint a fuller picture of who he is beyond the facts of this case," Rinsch's attorney, Daniel McGuinness, told Business Insider. He said they offer a consistent account of Rinsch as "a remarkably talented man of strong character who confronted extraordinary challenges in the period leading up to these events." In addition to $11 million in restitution, Netflix asked that Rinsch be ordered to pay $3.4 million in legal fees for a related civil legal dispute between them, as well as an additional $500,448 for the streamer's legal costs of helping prosecutors prepare the criminal case, according to Tuesday's filing. Rinsch's lawyers say he shouldn't be obligated to pay those legal fees. They wrote that "the devastating reputational and professional fallout" from the case has already deterred him from future wrongdoing. "The conduct at issue in this case — obtaining $11 million from a global streaming company to deliver a creative project with no oversight — will certainly not reoccur," they wrote. Read the original article on Business Insider

Product Hunt
startupproduct hunt

KugelAudio

By Garry Tan

Discussion | Link

TechRepublic AI
artificial intelligencechatbotschatgptgoogleinnovationinternationalnewsopenaiaiai promptseditors picksgenerative aigoogle geminiimage editingold photosphoto restorationtechtechrepublic aigemini

Learn six AI prompts for restoring, colorizing, sharpening, and repairing old photos using ChatGPT, Google Gemini, or similar image tools. The post 6 AI Prompts That Can Restore Old Photos in Seconds appeared first on TechRepublic.

Databricks
engineeringdata science and mldatabricks aiai engineeringdatadatabricksllminference

At Databricks, we’ve built a unique inference platform that serves every frontier...

The Conversation AI
aithe conversation airagagentagentsvision

‘Like drinking from a firehose’ – what it’s like to be the human in the AI loop

By Mary Tate, Associate Professor in Information Management, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Getty Images The government’s promised overhaul of New Zealand’s public service has made much of the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to streamline operations and compensate for a radically reduced workforce. This is in keeping with generally utopian visions of generative AI (GenAI) tools unleashing creativity, removing mundane, repetitive work, and “freeing up humans” for more fulfilling tasks. However, this may be naive. It’s true, GenAI tools can create efficiencies and cost savings for organisations as they become more powerful and their implementation becomes more sophisticated. In this win-win world, organisations and the people who work in them benefit. But there’s another side to this story as we become more aware of the downsides of GenAI tools – security risks, hallucinations, bias, a “dumbing down” of human input and lack of ethical insight. However, one thing that is not debated is the need for human oversight of GenAI work. For legal and reputational reasons, organisations require a “human in the loop” who is responsible for reviewing GenAI outcomes, and has the authority to overturn them. Easier said than done. As we discovered earlier this year when we held an industry panel discussion on GenAI for business students, being the human in the loop can be a role with great responsibility and pressure. Faster with fewer people Humans are expected to check and approve outputs, make decisions in ambiguous situations, provide feedback to improve the performance of GenAI tools, and offer ethical oversight and judgement. The main reason is that GenAI-tools cannot be held accountable for any of their outputs or decisions. GenAI tools are legally considered to be “property” not “persons” and they cannot hold rights or incur duties, meaning final accountability falls with humans. However, exactly which humans can vary. The organisation implementing the GenAI tool is most frequently considered responsible for any of its behaviours and outputs. In other cases, especially if the tool can be shown to be faulty, the developers or tool vendors may be responsible. If a problem can be traced to incorrect or biased data, the provider of the data may have some responsibility. An unexpected negative consequence of GenAI implementation paradoxically arises from its success. Successful GenAI use means executives and managers are expecting to get things done faster with fewer people. Tasks that used to be done in days or weeks are expected to be done in hours. As a senior manager of a large multinational business told us: Our goal in the next 18 months is to cut the engineering team down to a quarter of its current size and we need to find out how to leverage AI tools to achieve this. The pressures on human reviewers When the overall volume of outputs is lifted substantially by AI tools, the human in the loop can become a major bottleneck. Within organisations there are now emerging “content creators” who know how to prompt GenAI tools to quickly generate proposals, reports and presentations even in domains where they lack expertise. These outputs will be sent to the “content reviewers” for “sanity checks”. Those reviewers are domain experts. They are expected to rectify errors, remove nonfactual hallucinated statements, improve quality and provide accountability and final endorsement. On one hand, a GenAI-powered “creator” can generate a plausible 50-page report in a matter of 15–30 minutes. On the other, the “reviewer” will have to spend hours reading, rectifying and rewriting to make the final report ready for the audience. This has transposed the workload distribution between “creators” and “reviewers”. At one time a creator would be responsible for around 80% of the total time and effort to produce an advanced draft or prototype, and a reviewer would use the remaining 20% to polish it. Now the distribution is less than 20% required from the creator, and more than 80% from the reviewer. One of our panellists described this as like “drinking from a firehose”. Sometimes reviewers have to “let it go”, as they cannot cope with the speed and volume of content coming towards them. But this coping strategy has potentially dire consequences for the organisations they serve. ‘Workslop’ and burnout There is also a personal cost. Subject-matter experts exposed to unrealistic expectations suffer from burnout, low job satisfaction and high turnover in the organisations we spoke with. They are overloaded while junior colleagues are losing their jobs or aren’t being hired in the first place. If expert reviewers resign, they may be replaced by more junior colleagues, who are more prepared to trust AI-generated content and sign it off rapidly. This can become a cycle of decreasing quality, and also raises the question of where the next generation of expert reviewers will come from. Generating “workslop” (content that seems professional but is of uncertain quality) is cheap and fast, while genuine accountability is difficult. Simply having a nominal human in the loop is not enough. Quality human oversight needs to be designed in, budgeted for, valued and supported by organisational processes and culture. The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.