Categories
AI crypto technology

'Minister' makes the Netherlands look utterly ridiculous in Asia

Asia Tech Summit 2023 in Singapore

'Be curious, not judgmental.' That's the message of my favorite Ted Lasso series. Mindful of that credo, I attended the Asia Tech Summit in Singapore this week, followed the launch of the Apple Vision Pro, the magic glasses of glasses, and tried to get to the bottom of the lawsuit filed by U.S. authorities against crypto exchanges Binance and Coinbase. Unfortunately, things already went wrong during the first hour of the Asia Tech Summit, in which Secretary of State Van Huffelen was overcome by an overdose of unfounded self-confidence. 

Dutch pride abroad, 'minister' of digitization Alexandra van Huffelen

The Asia Tech Summit is particularly interesting because it brings together business and government institutions, with the idea that both sides develop an understanding of the challenges facing the other. Singapore Finance Minister and incoming Prime Minister Lawrence Wong provided the kickoff, after which Kaja Kallas (Estonia's first female prime minister) and Jacinda Ardern (New Zealand's youngest ever prime minister) paved the way for the first substantive panel, on the opportunities and threats of AI. Participating in this was State Secretary Van Huffelen, along with the president of Microsoft Asia and Nvidia's board member who deals with AI.

As the only other Dutch speaker, I was above average in my interest in Ms. Van Huffelen, and Google learned that she had a typical resume for a Dutch administrator: having been an alderman (sustainability in Rotterdam), director of a semi-governmental body (GVB in Amsterdam) and as State Secretary of Finance, she had inherited the Supplement affair, from which it is difficult to judge from a distance how adequately she had handled this painful dossier.

Nothing wrong with that, I thought, in the spirit of Ted Lasso, stay positive! After all, with the Supplements affair still in the back of her mind, hopefully she had taken a ride in Singapore on the phenomenal subway (clean, fast, cheap and safe, only resembles the GVB subway from very distant places because it is also transportation on rails) and would surely show some humility and modesty? So I expected and hoped, but nothing could be further from the truth. The state, which for incomprehensible reasons is heralded abroad as Minister of Kingdom Relations and Digitalization, went in with a straight leg almost from the kickoff.

Strategic action plan

For those with a strong stomach, the entire session can be watched back here, but the gist is that Van Huffelen sees mostly threats in AI and noted disappointment at the very beginning that nothing more has been heard of the idea of stopping AI development for six months. This is especially strange because the Dutch cabinet produced a policy paper as early as 2019 under state secretary Keijzer of EZ, which mostly sang the praises of AI. Participating in that cabinet was D66, Van Huffelen's party, and she even joined it as state secretary in 2020. There is a NL AI Coalition(NL AIC), in which government, business and knowledge institutions work together, and there is an AINed foundation that may spend 204.5 million Euros of government money to stimulate AI in the Netherlands.

In 2019, a policymaker thought a baby wearing VR glasses from Lidl had something to do with AI

Van Huffelen did not say a word about this and pretended that AI is viewed exclusively with a critical eye in the Netherlands. Her substantive contribution can be summarized as a series of clichés that the citizen comes first (gosh) and should not be forgotten (boy) and that there is more to life than making a profit; the latter she must have learned from the tens of thousands of victims of the Supplements affair.

For me, the moment at the very beginning was crucial, when it became apparent that Van Huffelen is either particularly ignorant or particularly underhanded. A combination of the two I would not rule out after her performance. After 1 minute 50, Van Huffelen literally said:

" We have seen many problems with AI, I have seen that in my country, even the AI that the government used turned out to be very biased."

state secretary Alexandra van Huffelen

Excuse me, to dismiss the Supplements affair, which has ruined the lives of tens of thousands of people, in which over 2,000 children were placed out of their homes and on which the cabinet fell in which Van Huffelen, nota bene, was himself responsible for this dossier, as a result of AI, is downright disgraceful.

Therefore, this brief refresher for Ms. Van Huffelen, who seems to have no active memory of the Supplements affair:

  • until 2019, dual citizenship was a selection rule in the Tax Department. That is a policy decision made by *people*. These victims were extra checked, for years, without knowing it, and could not appeal the inclusion in this group of extra checked. This was Kafka for anyone with a foreign last name.
  • The Personal Data Authority concluded that the Tax Authority's processing was "unlawful, discriminatory and therefore improper" which constituted a serious violation of the AVG. The Dutch Tax Authority itself violated Dutch law! (It is therefore downright bizarre that as recently as January 17 of this year, this article was published on the Belastingdienst's site, reporting that everything went perfectly by the book).
  • Officials at the top of the Inland Revenue stopped benefits from people even though they knew they were entitled to them. Up to the highest level, it was decided to continue this unlawful approach for years .
  • Inland Revenue officials demanded punishment for executives, but none were punished.

In short, the Surcharge Affair is an accumulation of wrong and evil policy instructions. It has nothing, but nothing, to do with AI. Because AI is precisely about machine learning, computer programs that get smarter as more data is added to them. Whether the Surcharge Affair was in part due to institutional racism or racial profiling I leave to sociologists and activists, but in any case it was "just" the work of incompetent and scummy people.

Ms. Van Huffelen apparently wanted to score with party colleagues tens of thousands of miles away. Perhaps the next D66 newsletter will contain a glowing passage about how their state lectured the big bad Microsoft. In any case, it will be bonus points in certain circles if Van Huffelen aspires to a job in Brussels and wants to further profile herself as a fighter for civil rights against tech capitalism. After all, she certainly wanted to profile herself.

Ready steward at the Evening Walk

Each speaker received in advance an explanation of the dress code, "business casual (for gentlemen: suit, no tie). I don't know what her letter said, but I'm sure it wasn't "ready steward at the Evening Four. Van Huffelen's yellow dress and particularly ungainly appearance by Asian standards stood out more than her substantive contribution.

If someone in Asia makes a comment on a panel with which you disagree, you don't say, especially as a representative of a country, 'that is not true.' Then you say, for example, 'I have a different viewpoint.' Or: 'another way of looking at this, is xyz'. In the audience, people wondered aloud whether Van Huffelen was wearing a beach dress and whether she had confused her islands, because 'the yellow of Cory Aquino was in the Philippines, not Singapore.' An ill-mannered Dame Edna is not what you want to portray as the Netherlands in one of the largest global markets.

The most embarrassing moment, although I wonder if Ms. Van Huffelen caught it, was when a real minister, Josephine Teo of Singapore's Ministry of Communications and Information, announced the creation of the AI Verify Foundation. Not a policy paper without clear goals, but a foundation in which business and government jointly establish tests that companies and governments worldwide can use to test AI applications. Teo emphasized that AI is so important especially for small countries like Singapore because it can increase a country's efficiency and production without additional human labor. No question.

Quantum computing near, threatens cryptography

There were more interesting announcements at the Asian Tech Summit. First, Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat reported the creation of the National Quantum-Safe Network Plus (NQSN+). That's a mouthful and requires some explanation, this site reports:

'The National Quantum-Safe Network (NQSN+) focuses on establishing a national platform and testbed for a systematic build-out of quantum-safe communication technologies, by evaluating security and demonstrating the integration of quantum-safe applications, best practices and use cases.

The main goal is to deploy commercial quantum-secure technologies for trials with government agencies and private companies; to conduct in-depth evaluations of security systems; and to develop guidelines to support companies in adopting such technologies.'

Singapore aims to secure the crucial banking sector for the long term, hence the creation of this quantum-secure network. Indeed, the importance of quantum computing will grow rapidly in the coming years. The most engaging moment during the panel I participated in, on the future of Web 3.0, was when IBM Fellow Ray Harishankar explained (starting at 25.30) why quantum computing is crossing the path of the modern Internet and will be able to retroactively crack current cryptography.

Harishankar expects that between 2030 and 2035 quantum computers suitable for specific applications will become available. His message is as simple as it is ominous: to be ready for quantum computing in 2030, organizations must have their cryptography in order now because no password will soon be safe.

Singapore is collaborating on security and standardization with South Korea, which last month announced as much as $2.6 billion dollars to invest in quantum technology research. I already can't wait to hear what Secretary of State Van Huffelen has against quantum technology. 

Apple Vision Pro better device than expected, but for what?

What woman spends $3499 on ski goggles that mess up heur hair?

Apple finally announced the Apple Vision Pro, the first step toward a completely new form of computing. Marques Brownlee explained in this particularly good video what the Vision Pro excels at and where the challenges lie for Apple. I was surprised that the introductory price is still $500 higher than expected: $3499 is not the price buster of the month. For that, though, the Vision Pro is packed with high-quality sensors.

As an Apple fanboy, I was pleasantly surprised by the all-new interface: nothing keyboard and mouse, but delicate eye-tracking. Look at something and the glasses see it. Blinking becomes the new buying 😉 Even though it will probably take a decade for Apple headsets to generate a significant portion (more than 10%) of sales, it's great to see that Apple is finally trying something big and hard again and not spending billions on stock buybacks.

Zuckerberg responds

Mark Zuckerberg was smart enough to take extensive time (nearly 3 hours!) right after Apple's announcement to comment with Lex Fridman. He had a strong argument that the Apple Vision Pro seems to be made for solitary use and not for communication with others. For the Apple Vision Pro and its successors, that indeed seems like the next step, as users of the iPhone but even the Apple Watch use their devices primarily to communicate, in the case of the Apple Watch as a receiver.

The complete integration of the Apple ecosystem between Mac, iPhone, Apple watch and Vision Pro will be fascinating to follow. Over the next few years, it will be interesting to see what applications Apple develops to try to make the Vision Pro a mass-market product. I remain convinced that the biggest obstacle will be getting women excited about putting on a device that messes up their hair and makeup. Then the utility or fun of an Apple Vision Pro would have to be enormous.

Zuckerberg himself, meanwhile, has the greatest possible difficulty motivating and enthusing his people. The Washington Post reported that even before the latest round of layoffs in May, which brought the total number of layoffs at Meta to as many as 21,000 jobs, confidence in his leadership among staff had fallen to 26%. Even for a Dutch politician, that would be pathetically low.

Notable links

First, two reading tips for any person interested in AI and for "Minister" Van Huffelen:

  • Why AI will save the world. Netscape founder Marc Andreessen, particularly successful as an investor this century, explains in a lucid speech why AI has mostly positive aspects.

Further:

  • Interesting video in which Twitter founder Ev Williams talks about how he feels about Twitter under Elon Musk. An interview that gives the impression that the demise of his brainchild really hurts him.

Spotlight 9: The SEC goes wild on crypto exchanges

Sleepless week on stock markets, except for crypto exchanges

It was a soporific week in the stock markets, with the old school S&P 500 outperforming the tech funds. All the negativity about Bitcoin was apparently already priced in, as BTC barely dropped amid all the uproar over the announcement that the U.S. SEC has filed charges against Binance.

Last year I wrote about Binance's lack of commitment to combating money laundering. More surprising is the charge against Coinbase that the company sold shares without having the necessary licenses. In doing so, the SEC takes the position that at least some cryptocurrencies should be considered shares.

At the same time, it is not conclusively established that the SEC has the authority to pursue charges if elected representatives of the people are drafting legislation in the area the SEC is just now moving into. Former Wall Street Journal reporter Michael Casey, now the editorial boss at Coindesk, wrote a comprehensive analysis of the legal battle unfolding in the U.S. at the intersection of crypto and politics.

The shadow that the FTX debacle cast over the crypto sector has global repercussions. Also in Singapore, where unlike the Netherlands, failures do have consequences. Employees of sovereign wealth fund Temasek who invested in FTX and lost $275 million dollars (still less than one percent of invested assets) saw their salaries cut.

How much was not disclosed, but although investigations showed that all procedures had been followed, the fraud and theft by Bankman-Fried and consorts, Singapore's sovereign wealth fund managers was severely punished. I find this heavily punished, because in the end Bankman-Fried simply stole from his investors and customers, but maybe I am too Dutch and used to incompetent souls rolling from one cabinet to another.

Categories
AI technology

Does AI mean the end of the world for Do-It-Yourselfers?

'Reducing the risk of extinction from apple pie should be a global priority, alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear wars.'

If this had been apple pie and not AI, the Journal would have opened with it.

Had that been the one-line statement made public last Tuesday by dozens of leaders in the field of AI (artificial intelligence, artificial intelligence), it would have been bigger world news than it is now. Only it did not mention apple pie as a threat to the world, but AI. That made the statement a lot harder for journalists to interpret, because AI is a kind of water of technology: it can be used to give people drinks, or waterboard them. The line between those is clear: It's about who decides to stop drinking.

The fear is that in the case of AI, the software itself decides when something happens. Or stops. I once started blogging and nowadays write this newsletter because it forces me to keep up with my field and then organize my thoughts publicly. So herewith my immodest attempt to put the latest developments in AI into a broader perspective.

Who are these people?

First, that statement last Tuesday, issued by the Center for AI Safety (CAIS, pronounced Kees) whose mission is "to reduce the risks of artificial intelligence on a societal scale. We learned from the Watergate scandal that the first thing you do is follow the flow of money, so where does Kees get the money? The Open Philanthropy Foundation donated over $5 million and is in turn funded by former Wall Street Journal reporter Cari Tuna and Dustin Moskovitz, one of the founders of Facebook. (You can guess for yourself whose piggy bank of that couple was turned over the most for this donation. Oh well, at least the money Facebook makes from selling out its users' privacy will be spent on something useful).

In Europe, tricky dossiers usually involve a covenant between government, industry and a party that policymakers describe as ''civil society'' in those kinds of papers that nobody reads. America is the land of the one-liner, so there they arrived at this chunky phrase: ''Reducing the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority, alongside other social-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear wars.''

And that was it, that's all there is in the 22-word statement. It led to rather vacuous media reports from which you can almost read the reporter's despair. Like "my goodness, do I now have to explain to what extent this statement is similar to Robert Oppenheimer's on the danger of nuclear weapons, or shall I just list the list of signatories? It became mostly the latter, of course, and you will recognize most of the names from previous newsletters. CNN bravely lists, "The statement was signed by prominent industry officials, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman; the so-called "godfather" of AI, Geoffrey Hinton; top executives and researchers at Google DeepMind and Anthropic; Kevin Scott, chief technology officer of Microsoft; Bruce Schneier, the pioneer of Internet security and cryptography; climate advocate Bill McKibben; and musician Grimes.

Who didn't sign?

The latter is kind of funny, because Grimes is the baby mama of as far as we know the youngest son of Elon Musk, who is even named X Æ A-Xii because it is the elven spelling of the term AI. (Read that last sentence again and realize that this is a defenseless child.) The very name Elon Musk was missing from the signatories. Other people who conspicuously did not sign the statement, and whose names it seems to me would have made sense if CNN had inquired why, are Jeff Bezos (founder and chairman of Amazon's Supervisory Board), Sundar Pichai (CEO of Alphabet, Google's parent company, man of this brilliant speech), Andreessen Horowitz (the leading investor in technology companies), Mark Zuckerberg (CEO Meta, formerly known as Facebook, buyer of former competitors like Instagram and Whatsapp) and Peter Thiel (financier of, among others, LinkedIn, Yelp, Facebook and Palantir and through his Founders Fund also Airbn and Space X). And further missing are just about all players in the technology field from India, South Korea, Japan and China.  

All of these parties have the knowledge, clout and motivation to become a major player in the global market for AI applications. And they have not signed the no doubt well-intentioned declaration to take care that the world does not perish to AI. Of course, that doesn't mean that the chief bosses of the tech world will try to destroy the world with AI; after all, killing off the world's population would be bad for their quarterly numbers.

What about Bill Gates?

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates publicly hopes that Amazon and Google will lose out to AI. Furthermore, he has little influence on the public debate about AI; it is no coincidence that CNN did not even mention Gates in the list of signatories and even Elon Musk's ex did. I place little value on the predictions about technology from the man who, in his November 1995 book The Road Ahead, called the Internet not the future, but a dirt road compared to the information super highway he himself would build in the form of MSN.

It remains incomprehensible to me that Gates does not provide more analysis on the business aspects of technology, but continues to muse on the social implications. Because precisely as an entrepreneur, he remains, in my view, unparalleled. His vision is brilliant when measured over say 24 months, not 24 years.

Remember from Bill Gates especially these two achievements:

  • IBM was looking for an operating system for their new product, the personal computer, in 1981; Gates had nothing on hand but bought the obscure Quick and Dirty Operating System (QDOS) from a small software maker for seventy-five thousand dollars, changed the name to MS-DOS (because the spotless IBM could not do anything with the word Dirty) and did not sell the software, but licensed it to IBM on a non-exclusive basis. That form of licensing was virtually unknown in the software world. Primarily on the basis of this one deal, Microsoft became the most valuable company and Gates the richest man in the world.
  • In 1995, Microsoft was the most powerful company in the technology world and Gates the world's richest man. Only, the whole image of Microsoft and Gates was focused on a world where computers barely worked together, let alone communicated together or enabled transactions. While Jeff Bezos was a few miles away building Amazon into an e-commerce machine and would follow in Gates' footsteps as the world's richest man, Gates wrote a memo to the top of Microsoft that would become known as "the Internet tidal wave. In fact, Gates said, "I was wrong. We need to make all our products Internet-capable.' I had never seen a CEO confess his own mistakes in such a way and have the entire corporation turned around and focused, in such a short time. Admitting that he had overlooked the Internet struck me as great. (And I was relieved, because my brainchild was called Planet Internet and it's not good to wake up every day thinking the world's richest man is saying your product sucks.)

His book The Road Ahead would come out six months later and already be dated upon publication. It was especially odd because Gates had so strongly emphasized the importance of the Internet in his memo. The Internet, Gates orated in his book, was built on antiquated technology and therefore too limited to transmit information, communications and transactions over it on a large scale.

What happened next was as hilarious as it was symbolic, because his book required a second version as quickly as his software did: just a month after the book was published, Gates began work on a second version, which appeared in October 1996 and was no less than 20,000 words longer, just as his software counted more and more lines of code. In the second version of the book, Gates made the Internet much more central.

The only thing I liked about The Road Ahead was that Gates had written it with then Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold, a former world barbecue champion who had studied under Stephen Hawking. From Myhrvold, I would have liked to have read more.

Bill Gates is like a nerd version of Marco van Basten: a top player who is phenomenal as an analyst, but failing as a coach. I sincerely hope Bill Gates will write about applications of AI, about business models, opportunities and threats; about everything except what it will mean for society. And full disclosure: my opinion of Gates is independent of my own experiences with him and Microsoft in the browser war.

Impact, a Belgian employment agency for technicians, came up with this nice advertisement

Why is AI so promising and so dangerous?

Far more important than Gates' opinion on AI, I found this article about an officer in the U.S. Air Force who gave a reflection on a drone that went wild because of AI and wanted to kill its own driver. The first gasp was that this actually happened, but apparently it was just a scenario being discussed in the U.S. military. Thank goodness, because it is the ultimate Terminator nightmare when the monopoly of violence falls to computers.

While a huge technological achievement, even Nvidia's new supercomputer, which I wrote about last week, will not lead to a mass breakthrough of AI applications. Such computers are so expensive and complex that only a small number of companies have the capabilities to use them properly. Of course, it is a huge revenue generator for Nvidia, as Amazon, Microsoft, Meta and Google will gladly stock this computer en masse, but it is precisely open source AI that seems to be the definitive breakthrough of AI.

These are not my words, but this is according to a leaked internal Google document. According to the leaked document, the open source AI community is so active and highly developed, that as soon as more accessible development capabilities emerge, both OpenAI and Google are hopeless. While OpenAI and Google use "proprietary" LLMs (Large Language Models), the models in open source are actually ready for public use. This makes the group of global developers larger than the OpenAI and Google staffs, the thinking goes.

Hooray for QLoRA?

And now it appears those cheaper tools will be available within a year! Because it seems to be possible to develop AI applications on some out of the box gaming PCs. LLMs used to develop generative AI applications can normally only run on enormously powerful computers. That is the reason for the explosive price increases of the makers of such devices such as Nvidia and Marvell, which I wrote about last week. As one reader sent, "QLoRA completely changes the landscape. You can use the same 8x80GB on a single 48GB card. From an $8x15K piece of kit to a souped-up PC.'

Translated into slightly more normal Dutch: the fact that you can cram 96 billion 4-bit weights into 48GB (which is huge) means that AI development is now available to hobbyists. What normally costs a ton of equipment can now be done for a few thousand Euros. For enthusiasts: here the scientific article. And here the tweet predicting that within a year these computers will be commonplace.

AI for Do-It-Yourselfers

The question is what applications will be built if hobbyists, enthusiasts and rogues will have the ability to create AI applications. And the follow-up question is how to monitor and regulate this, if at all possible.

Finally for this piece on AI:

Notable links:

  • Artifact, from the founders of Instagram, is a personal news reader. Just downloaded, but not yet tested, with the slogan: "Finally, an AI-driven news feed with you in control. Because no startup can do without the word AI in its slogan in 2023. I'd love to hear readers' opinions, anonymity guaranteed.
  • Bold: a detailed forecast of the development of AI Singularity through 2029. Someone should check this annually for accuracy; I certainly forget.
  • Meta (Facebook's) wants every employee assigned to a particular branch to show up at the office at least three days a week starting in September. Unfortunately, it is not clear what percentage of employees this will apply to. It remains to be seen whether this will cause many talented employees to leave, as as many as 150,000 jobs were lost in the US tech sector this year alone.

Event of the week: ATxSummit Singapore

A not-so-subtle humblebrag: the creator of your Sunday tech newsletter is participating Tuesday in a panel on Web 3.0 beautifully titled "Everything, Everywhere, All at Once. It's part of the ATxSummit in Singapore, where "governments, businesses and knowledge centers gather to discuss the role of technology in our shared digital future.

27 recipients of an email about a panel in Singapore with four participants

People often ask what working in Singapore is like, and I usually answer that question with "intense. Everyone is professional, from a receptionist to a minister, focused and dedicated. At the same time, I worry about whether people are relaxing enough and not working too hard. See above screenshot of an email about the preliminary online meeting on our panel, which consists of only four participants and yet went out to 27 people. You'd think this would lead to a huge bureaucracy, but officials, for example, answer email inquiries substantively within three business days. Sometimes I begrudge everyone in Singapore a daddy or mommy day a week.

Since I will have access to a make-up artist, something that has been at the top of my wish list for years, I expect there will be a livestream that I will share through my accounts on Twitter, LinkedIn and Instagram. The panel will take place from 9 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. Dutch time. Advance warning: it's only for the connoisseur/lover of concepts like "participatory data" and "decentralization of identity.

Topping the Spotlight 9 inside: Nvidia

For years, the technology sector has been talking about a handful of dominant players: Alphabet (Google's parent company), Amazon, Apple, Facebook (now Meta) and Microsoft. Since this week, we can count Nvidia among them, which passed Meta in market value. For a while, Nvidia was even "a trillion dollar company," or worth more than a trillion: a thousand times a billion. (A billion in English is a billion and a trillion in English is a trillion. They are not the inventors of the useless inch and driving on the left for nothing).

Meta past in market value, 175% increase this year: Nvidia belongs in Spotlight 9

Therefore, in my completely arbitrary survey of key economic indicators for the tech world, my Spotlight 9, I threw out the Dow Jones Index and replaced it with Nvidia. After all, for the overall market, the S&P 500 is already in the list, for crypto the tokens Bitcoin and Ethereum, and that leaves no fewer than six indicators of stock market sentiment for the tech sector.

But beware: anyone who buys a share of Nvidia now does so at a P/E ratio of over 200! Compare that to Apple, with a P/E ratio of 30, and then I dare say it is unrealistic to expect Nvidia to grow more than six times as fast as Apple. In other words, Nvidia stock is extremely expensive, regardless of that AI-driven demand for GPUs and the new Nvidia supercomputer.

Speaking of Apple, I wrote, to the annoyance of a number of Apple employees who I thought I could count among my circle of friends until that article, about the long-awaited Apple mixed reality headset, probably called the Apple Reality Pro. This device, the first all-new device since the Apple Watch in 2015, is expected to be unveiled at WWDC on Monday. If it really is something special, I will write an extra edition of this newsletter on Tuesday morning. If not, thanks for your interest and see you next week.