The global fascination with artificial intelligence is driving deep conversations about the future of work , the philosophy of truth , and even what it means to be human. But these important discussions obscure a fundamental reality about AI: at this stage of the game, most non-specialists are making it up as we go – to the detriment of policymakers, business leaders, and consumers alike.
This includes the likes of Washington D.C. policymakers, venerable journalists and media institutions, and financial experts and analysts evaluating companies with a big stake in AI and its future. As technology advances and we continue exploring unnavigated waters, it’s time to reckon with our lack of understanding to avoid overconfidence in either direction – even as we make it a national priority to close that gap. Remarkably, one example of such humility can be found in perhaps its most unlikely place: the halls of Congress. Representative Jay Obernolte remarked to the New York Times last March that most of his colleagues do not understand the technology – a sentiment has been publicly echoed by other lawmakers.
Some would argue that members of Congress are unable to grasp the technology because of their age. But that explanation falls terribly short: while public polling shows that younger people are less likely to have heard or read “nothing at all” about AI, 81 percent of Americans over the age of 65 have at least engaged “a little” with information about it. A more straightforward explanation that AI is simply very difficult to grasp is likely best.
Congress has since held closed-door AI sessions with leaders to get up to speed – a luxury most Americans do not have. They must turn to the news media for information. That is at least somewhat troubling.
Consider coverage of generative AI tools last year. We all certainly remember alarming headlines like “Bing’s A.I. Chat: ‘I Want to be Alive ” and “The Google engineer who thinks the company’s AI has come to life .” Of course, it was always obscured that large-language learning models simply sound human because they have been trained, on mountains of data, to sound like humans.
To be fair, coverage has improved and gotten more nuanced in recent months, which is a trend we should expect to continue. But the reality is that we still have a long way to go due to AI’s complexity and rapid advancement, which is proving problematic for businesses, their bottom lines, and the broader investment climate. Here, it is useful to look at the case of Japan’s SoftBank, a long-time investor in futuristic technology that has bet big on AI, with some losses but also a very prominent recent win.
Consider a crown jewel in its portfolio, the British chipmaker and intellectual property giant Arm, which went public last September with a clear message: “AI runs on Arm .” Some analysts disputed that premise on technical grounds: chips developed on Arm IPO are distinct from the GPUs used in AI. But this was a misreading of the AI ecosystem. Just ask Alphabet and Nvidia, which certainly know a thing or two about AI and have invested heavily in Arm . Many analysts have since changed their tune, with one telling Reuters, “The market is starting to have a better handle on their business model and how that aligns with some of the bigger chip design trends over the next few years.”
The admission that the market misread Arm’s positioning is revealing – Arm’s IPO was, after all, the largest of 2023. It highlights how many analysts and regulators, financial and otherwise, still have a long way to go before we fully grasp the AI revolution and its implications for companies like Arm and others in the market.
It’s not just analysts who got it wrong. Arm skepticism seemingly played a role in the S&P’s decision to downgrade SoftBank’s investment ranking last year. It has since refused to increase it – even after a massively successful Arm IPO, its skyrocketing valuation, and SoftBank’s own positive earnings – perhaps because it believes, as many do, that AI is more hype than reality.
This matters. AI investment is not going away any time soon: a Q3 2023 Goldman Sachs report projects AI investment to approach $200 billion annually just next year , and SoftBank alone is rumored to be launching a $100 billion AI chip venture that will soon begin investing in generative AI startups. Other companies and major investors are obviously following suit.
These investments, from SoftBank and others, will undoubtedly have ripple effects on the market, consumers, and policymakers. It is past time for us to close the knowledge gap on AI so that we can properly assess and understand the dynamics shaping our future.
Without it, we are far more likely to implement bad policies, poorly utilize new tools on an individual level, and misunderstand which companies are on the cutting edge. That would be a loss for everyone. Changing course will require thoughtful reflection from leaders in many sectors – and it all starts with a little humility.
Dr. Jose Marquez Dr. Jose Marquez, PhD. is the founder of The National Association Latinos in Information Sciences and Technology @techlatino. With an illustrious career spanning over 27 years, Dr. Jose Marquez stands as a pioneer in championing technology adoption for the Latino community. As the CEO of TechLatino and the visionary founder of The National Association of Latinos in Information Sciences and Technology, he has been instrumental in breaking down barriers and creating pathways for Latinos in the tech sector. Dr. Marquez’s unwavering commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion has reshaped the landscape of the industry, making him a revered advocate and leader in the fight for tech empowerment. TechLatino is a driving force for innovation and opportunity, ensuring that Latinos and all people of color have a seat at the table in the digital age.
Copyright © 2024 California Business Journal. All Rights Reserved.
