Mediaboss Marketing

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella is guiding the company through one of the most important years in its history. (GeekWire File Photo / Todd Bishop)

This week on the GeekWire Podcast: Microsoft staked its financial claim in the AI gold rush this week, announcing pricing for its upcoming Microsoft 365 Copilot technology: a whopping $30/user per month on top of its existing license fees.

Wall Street loved it. One analyst called it eye popping. Investors sent the companys shares to a new record on the day the news was announced.

The upcoming product, fueled by Microsoft and OpenAI technologies, is designed to integrate with Microsoft productivity apps and work with internal business data, going beyond the capabilities of web-based generative AI technologies.

But will companies see that much value in what Microsoft has to offer? Microsoft 365 Copilot is still in private preview, for now, but the pricing suggests that the company likes what its seeing and hearing from early users.

Its part of a big week that also saw the company clear a major hurdle in its $69 billion Activision-Blizzard acquisition, winning a key court ruling and giving itself an extra three months of breathing room to complete the blockbuster gaming deal.

But behind the scenes, Microsoft is grappling with shaky morale amid ongoing cutbacks, and growing questions about the gap between employee and executive compensation.

Meanwhile, a high-profile U.S. government breach by a Chinese hacking group is raising new questions about the security of Microsoft products, and threatening to undermine a growing source of revenue for the company.

Its shaping up as one of the biggest years in Microsoft history, and this was perhaps the biggest week of the year so far for the company.

Next up: Microsoft will report its quarterly earnings Tuesday.

Stories discussed on this weeks show:

Listen above, or subscribe to GeekWire in Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you listen.

More here:

GeekWire Podcast: Microsoft's big bet on the AI economy, and the ... - GeekWire

The documentary series "Goliath" captures the life and times of basketball icon Wilt Chamberlain. (Photo courtesy of SHOWTIME and Religion of Sports)

As actors and writers strike in the entertainment industry in a fight they claim is for their job security and fair wages, there are still films making their anticipated releases. "Goliath" is one of them, and it premiered at the Uninterrupted Film Festival in Hollywood last week, and since then it has been on the hot seat for the use of artificial intelligence.

"Goliath" is a three-part documentary examining the historic life, career and impact of basketball legend Wilt Chamberlain. Controversy has surrounded the documentary due to the use of an AI-created voice of Chamberlain. That has raised questions regarding the ethical integrity of recreating the voice of someone who is deceased.

Directors Christopher Dillon and Rob Ford, and the films production team, went through a tedious process to ensure that they captured Chamberlain authentically. That included getting approval for the use of AI for Chamberlains voice from his family.

The idea [for the film] came from our desire to give Wilt what he wanted in his lifetime, " Dillon said, describing the motivations for the film. But he didn't get it, which is the opportunity to try to correct what he thought were the misconceptions about him.

The directors said the relationship between the family and the film came via Hall of Famer Kevin Garnett, who facilitated the relationship between the Chamberlain family and the filmmakers. Garnett is also a producer of Goliath.

When we first presented the idea to them, they were excited and thought it was super cool, Ford said. From a technological standpoint, and just wow, that sounds interesting. I'm not sure they fully comprehended it, probably neither did we and what that actually meant, until you get into hearing it.

And then on the back end once it was done, and we shared it with them, they loved it. They were very emotionally touched to feel like they were able to reconnect with their 'Uncle Dip,' which is what they called him, or their 'Brother Dip.' And truthfully they had a hard time distinguishing the AI voice from his real voice when they were watching the movie, straight through whether it's archive or it's AI, which for us, that's like a great testament to how well done it is if the actual family can't separate because they know him and his voice.

The production team partnered with a Ukrainian company, Respeecher, to produce the AI voice for Chamberlain. The voice heard in the film started with a voice actor, who was recorded reading excerpts from Chamberlains journals. With the actors voice along with archival audio footage of Chamberlain and quotes from his journals, Respeecher recreated the voice.

Dillon and Ford emphasized that the actor's voice is essential as he is the one who produces the emotion, cadence and tone of the voice heard in the film. That was important considering Chamberlain had a speech impediment.

We wanted Wilt to be present," Dillon said. And surprisingly for someone as famous as he is, because of when he lived, there just isn't a ton of footage of him talking about these things. And there were no audiobooks or anything like that. So we selected quotes that he wrote or that he was quoted as saying in periodicals or newspapers that we felt were the appropriate commentary on the story that we were telling. And we casted a voice actor to read them.

Respeecher has also partnered with Disney to produce AI-generated voices for some of the Star Wars spinoff series, most notably recreating the iconic voice of James Earl Jones as Darth Vader.

Due to the current labor strike in the entertainment industry, AI has been a hot topic, notably as a threat to take away jobs from people. Ford said that has contributed to the pushback they have received in regard to the AI prominence in Goliath.

Like anything in life, you know, technology continues to advance and create new opportunities to do funny, unique, cool, interesting things, Ford said. I think it's just about how you do it and making sure, case by case, that people are compensated if that is a scenario that's relative to that situation, or are credited appropriately, or asked for approval and support, if someone's voice is going to be used.

For us, it's very different because writers are striking in the sense of these are people who are alive, who have celebrity and name and voice recognition who don't want their stuff to be appropriated, whereas Wilt is deceased. We didn't even have an option from inception to interview him, which would have been our first option, if we could have interviewed him, and this would not be an issue.

Dillon has reservations about the future of AI, but feels differently in the way it was used in the film.

In retrospect, I wish that we had leaned into our disclaimer, just making it very clear that there's an actor involved here because I think people are in some of the reviews projecting onto it. That it was all generated by a computer and therefore, it sounds robotic to them, but it's like, actually, no, that's a human being saying those words. And that is, in a way, someone's, like, sort of cognitive bias coming in, in part because they dont know how we did it.

Though the film has faced criticism, Ford and Dillon are confident that they handled the use of AI the right way, and once the labor strife is resolved, the project will be appreciated.

I think folks will embrace it. Five, 10 years from now we look back, it'll probably just feel commonplace and normal, in the space of these types of projects, in my opinion.

Original post:

Directors of Wilt Chamberlain documentary 'Goliath' defend use of AI in recreating legend's voice - Yahoo Sports

Quinn told attendees that Stoll has been a mentor and friend for many years and that the award represents Stolls role as the patriarch of the first family of IP and a flame in the heart of the IP community.

Renee and Gene Quinn with IPWatchdog Masters Hall of Fame Inductee, Bob Stoll (center)

IPWatchdog held its first annual Patent Prosecution and Portfolio Management Masters Program Tuesday, June 20, to Wednesday, June 21, covering cutting-edge developments that impact the ability to get enforceable patent applications through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), such as the recent ruling in Amgen v. Sanofi, the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) for patenting, and ethics pitfalls practitioners may face as a result of AI use.

The program also featured the latest inductions into the IPWatchdog Masters Hall of Fame; IPWatchdog Founder and CEO Gene Quinn presented Bob Stoll, former USPTO Commissioner for Patents and currently Partner and Co-Chair of the IP Group at Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath, with an award, and also recognized the late Q. Todd Dickinson, who served as USPTO Director from 1999 to 2001.

Stoll also participated in the Masters program on Tuesday, serving as moderator for a panel titled The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly: Tips and Strategies for Building a Strong Patent Portfolio, where panelists discussed some of the traps patent attorneys fall into with respect to sloppy prosecution. Commenting on the mistakes he often sees when hes handed applications that have been worked on previously, he said prosecution mistakes are made on all sides, but it doesnt have to be all bad or all ugly. Sometimes the examiners are at fault, sometimes the applicants are. I think if we all tried to do the best work we can, wed have a better patent system, Stoll said.

Bob Bahr (left), Drew Hirshfeld and John White (far right)

Another panel featured recently retired Commissioner for Patents Drew Hirshfeld, who participated in a session titled, Practical Tips for Increasing Patent Allowance Rates, where panelists discussed in part the ins and outs of examiner interviews and interview summaries. Some of the panelists and audience members expressed frustration that examiners often refuse interviews and they disagreed on how to deal with that problem. While some said going to a Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) or using the USPTOs Patent Ombuds Office was the right move, others said going around an examiner would only result in resentment and ultimate rejection.

Once an interview has been conducted, the interview summary that gets filed as part of the record becomes key. Hirshfeld said he has seen some interview summaries that make you shudder, both from attorneys and examiners. The struggle often comes from the fact that the Office would like the interview summary to be accurate, while practitioners might want to gloss over certain points that were covered. Though he made it clear he wasnt speaking for the Office anymore, Hirshfeld said, From the Offices perspective I think the right interview is the accurate interview. From a practitioners standpoint, you may or may not want everything that was said in there.

In a panel following Hirshfelds, titled Patent Robustness After Amgen: Drafting Specifications to Satisfy the 112 Requirements of Tomorrow, current USPTO Deputy Commissioner for Patents, Robert Bahr, said that if an examiner is being unreasonable about the interview process, you really should talk to the SPE or the group director. They do want to help, and if no one ever complains everyone thinks everythings hunky dory.

But Bahrs fellow panelist, Dan Evans, of Merchant & Gould, wasnt convinced. When you start going around examiners, my experience is it comes back to bite you in the patoot, Evans said.

Overall, while the panelists said Amgen has implications for means-plus-function claiming, the consensus was that not much has changed post-Amgen because such claims have always been questionable to begin with.

Two panels on Wednesday tackled the role of AI in prosecution, including one on the ethical implications for practitioners with respect to the use of AI in the invention process, as well as the many other issues that may arise, and another panel on The Challenges of Drafting and Prosecuting AI Patents.

I would hope to have a conversation with every client about every instance of use of AI that involves their confidential data, said Jeffrey Cobia of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, a panelist who took part in the ethics session.

Renee Quinn presents the illustrated portrait of Q. Todd Dickinson during his posthumous induction into the IPWatchdog Masters Hall of Fame.

Upon awarding Stoll with a trophy in the shape of a flame, Quinn told attendees that Stoll has been a mentor and friend for many years and that the award represents Stolls role as the patriarch of the first family of IP and a flame in the heart of the IP community.

Dickinson passed away in May of 2020; in an article commemorating his legacy, Quinn said that Dickinson was a great man who, through his many accomplishments, did much domestically and internationally within the intellectual property world [and] one of my best, truest friends.

Videos of the panels from this weeks program will be made available in the coming weeks.

The IPWatchdog Wall of Fame

See the original post here:

AI, Amgen, Ethics and Awards: Inaugural IPWatchdog Program ... - IPWatchdog.com

Artificial Intelligence: The Journey to a Thinking Machine

When the latest iteration of generative artificial intelligence dropped in late 2022, it was clear that something significant had changed.

The language model ChatGPT reached 100 million active monthly users in just two months, making it the fastest-growing consumer application in history. Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs predicted that AI could add 7% to global GDP over a 10-year period, almost $7 trillion, but also replace 300 million jobs in the process.

But even as AI continues to disrupt every aspect of life and work, its worth taking a step back.

In this visualization, the first in a three-part series called The AI Revolution for sponsor VERSES AI, we ask how we got here, where were going, and how close are we to achieving a truly thinking machine?

The term artificial Intelligence was coined by computer scientist John McCarthy in 1955 in a conference proposal. Along with Alan Turing, Marvin Minsky, and many others, he is often referred to as one of the fathers of AI.

Since then, AI has grown in leaps and bounds. AI has mastered chess, beating Russian grandmaster and former World Chess Champion Garry Kasparov in 1997. In 2016, Googles AlphaGo beat South Korean Go champion Lee Sedol, 4-1. The nine-year gap in achievements is explained by the complexity of Go, which has 10360 possible moves compared to chess paltry 10123 combinations.

DALL-E arrived in 2021 and ChatGPT-4 in early 2023, which brings us to today.

Theres a big difference between the Roomba that vacuums your condo and HAL from 2001: Space Odyssey. This is why researchers working in the field have come up with the following ways to classify AI:

Despite a false alarm by one Google software engineer in 2022 and a paper by early GPT-4 boosters, no one really believes that recent generative AIs qualify as thinking machines, however you define it. ChatGPT, for all its capabilities, is still just a souped-up version of autocomplete.

That was the title of Philip K. Dicks science fiction classic and basis for the movie Blade Runner. In it, Harrison Ford plays a blade runner, a kind of private investigator who used a version of the Turing Test to ferret out life-like androids. But were not Harrison Ford and this isnt science fiction, so how could we tell?

People working in the field have proposed various tests over the years. Cognitive scientist Ben Goertzel thought that if an AI could enroll in college, do the coursework and graduate, then it would pass. Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple, suggested that if an AI could enter a strange house, find the kitchen, and then make a cup of coffee, then it would meet the threshold.

A common thread that runs through many of them, however, is the ability to perform at one thing that humans do without effort: generalize, adapt, and problem solve. And this is something that AI has traditionally struggled at, even as it continues to excel on other tasks.

And it may be that the current approach, which has shown incredible results, is running out of road.

Researchers have created thousands of benchmarks to test the performance of AI models on a range of human tasks, from image classification to natural language inference.According to Stanford Universitys AI Index, AI scores on standard benchmarks have begun to plateau, with median improvement in 2022 limited to just 4%.

New comprehensive benchmark suites have begun to appear in response, like BIG-Bench and HELM, but will these share the same fate as their predecessors? Quickly surpassed, but still no closer to an AIlike J.A.R.V.I.S. that could pass the Wozniak Coffee Test?

VERSES AI, a cognitive computing company specializing in next generation AI and the sponsor of this piece, may have an answer.

The company recently released research that shows how to build an AI that can not only think, but also introspect and explain its thought processes. Catch the next part of The AI Revolution series to learn more.

Learn more about how VERSES AI is building a smarter world.

Read the original here:

Artificial Intelligence: The Journey to a Thinking Machine - Visual Capitalist

As attendees at Cannes Lions 2023 sit around and discuss what form generative AI will and should take, creator Christina Najjar (better known as her nickname Tinx) has what seems like a hot take: she wants no part of artificial intelligence.

I dont like AI at all. AI will probably end humanity, and well be lucky if it doesnt. Im more focused on that than sort of some of the more immediate implications, Najjar said. I know some creators are working with AI already. I dont want to overly automate any aspect of my process right now.

Najjar has been working on investing in her influencer brand for three years and has grown it to include a merch deal under her Rich Mom series, hosting an ongoing podcast with SiriusXM and securing brand deals for her accounts, particularly across TikTok and Instagram.

This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity and length.

I cant think of where I would want to use AI instead of bouncing an idea off of a person or just going through the normal way. If that makes me old-fashioned, then so be it. Im not really interested in AI. AI should be used to find cures to diseases and solve global warming. I really dont think that we need to be eliminating any jobs in the creative space.

That just doesnt interest me. Even if it makes it more efficient, I would just rather speak to a person. Theres really no space for it in my world as of yet.

Audio is very intimate. Its very intimate to be in someones ear. Theres something very intimate about it because someone is usually doing something in private while they listen. So you really do have their attention more than, say, if theyre sitting in front of the TV and scrolling through TikTok mindlessly, or theyre on Instagram in between classes, like they might catch something, they might not.

With audio, I really have a chance to flesh out some of my bigger ideas and really connect with my community on them. And they go there with me. Im so lucky that they do. But thats kind of where I go deep. So whenever I have something, not necessarily more serious, but something that I just want to explore more than a 30-second Instagram story, Ill go to audio.

I think about format a lot. Why do I go to TikTok versus why do I listen to a podcast? I wanna be informed. Of course, I wanna be entertained, but I really want to walk away with something. Whereas TikTok, I want to just be entertained. Instagram, maybe I want some escapism. So I really try to think about why people are going to a certain platform or media, and then delivering the content in that way.

Ive always just created what I felt like I should create. Thats probably one of the reasons that I have found success. Trying to over-engineer a brand is so transparent and you can see when people are trying to do it really turns me off. So I just have never thought of it that way.

I work with mostly brands and products that I genuinely love and its very easy for me to talk about things that I love. Weve been very lucky in that sense.

https://digiday.com/?p=508109

Go here to see the original:

Why Tinx thinks AI will 'end humanity' and refuses to use it in content ... - Digiday