全部新闻
人们在发现AI生成的Deepfake声音方面真的很糟糕
2025-04-15 13:00:00
测试表明，人们很难将真实的人类声音与AI生成的声音区分开来，这引起了人们对基于语音的骗局的担忧。尽管个人可以在对话环境中或与熟悉的说话者中识别真实的声音，但他们通常无法准确区分真实的声音和虚假声音。这一发展对涉及伪造声音的欺诈带来了重大风险。
测试表明，人们很难将真实的人类声音与AI生成的声音区分开来，这引起了人们对基于语音的骗局的担忧。尽管个人可以在对话环境中或与熟悉的说话者中识别真实的声音，但他们通常无法准确区分真实的声音和虚假声音。这一发展对涉及伪造声音的欺诈带来了重大风险。
像chatgpt一样，唯一的秘密：这是IDF的人工智能的Genie
2025-04-15 12:38:56
以色列国防军（IDF）推出了一种新的AI工具Genie，利用抹布技术，该工具为指挥官提供了即时的战场见解。Genie在IDF的封闭网络上充当内部Web应用程序，并根据操作系统的实时数据提供详细的答案。尽管仍在试用版中，但它已经在所有军事指挥中心都在运营，并计划在三到四个月内发布完整的释放。该项目旨在通过将大量数据集成到简洁的自然语言响应中来简化决策，从而通过严格的源验证确保准确性。IDF的方法结合了尖端技术和专有数据，以提高运营效率，而无需从头开始构建AI模型。
以色列国防军（IDF）推出了一种新的AI工具Genie，利用抹布技术，该工具为指挥官提供了即时的战场见解。Genie在IDF的封闭网络上充当内部Web应用程序，并根据操作系统的实时数据提供详细的答案。尽管仍在试用版中，但它已经在所有军事指挥中心都在运营，并计划在三到四个月内发布完整的释放。该项目旨在通过将大量数据集成到简洁的自然语言响应中来简化决策，从而通过严格的源验证确保准确性。IDF的方法结合了尖端技术和专有数据，以提高运营效率，而无需从头开始构建AI模型。
您可以在接下来的十年中购买和持有的3种人工智能股票
2025-04-15 12:30:21
由于地缘政治不确定性和贸易战争，全球股票市场的动荡，对AI股票的影响负面影响。但是，具有强大基础知识的高质量AI公司对于长期投资仍然有希望。元平台尽管市场波动，但具有广泛的用户群和强大的AI策略，使其成为令人信服的选择。鉴于其预计的每年收入增长15-20％，因此目前的估值提供了一个很好的切入点。
由于地缘政治不确定性和贸易战争，全球股票市场的动荡，对AI股票的影响负面影响。但是，具有强大基础知识的高质量AI公司对于长期投资仍然有希望。元平台尽管市场波动，但具有广泛的用户群和强大的AI策略，使其成为令人信服的选择。鉴于其预计的每年收入增长15-20％，因此目前的估值提供了一个很好的切入点。
人工智能治理负责人Modelop赢得2025年人工智能卓越奖
2025-04-15 12:16:00
Modelop因其AI生命周期自动化和治理的创新方法而获得了商业情报集团2025年人工智能卓越奖。该奖项旨在表彰Modelop对在金融，医疗保健，制药，生物技术，CPG和零售等行业中推进AI的贡献。借助Fidelity Investments和Bristol Myers Squibb的客户，Modelop的软件为所有AI系统提供了全面的监督，可以更快地进入市场，同时确保遵守不断发展的法规。
Modelop因其AI生命周期自动化和治理的创新方法而获得了商业情报集团2025年人工智能卓越奖。该奖项旨在表彰Modelop对在金融，医疗保健，制药，生物技术，CPG和零售等行业中推进AI的贡献。借助Fidelity Investments和Bristol Myers Squibb的客户，Modelop的软件为所有AI系统提供了全面的监督，可以更快地进入市场，同时确保遵守不断发展的法规。
2025-04-15 12:07:00
AI Is Dead The author,持有人工智能研究生证书的作家，反对在出版业中使用AI，认为这样做是对人类创造力的误解。与常见的版权侵犯、抄袭等问题不同，作者的核心观点是AI本质上是没有意识和感知能力的存在，其生成的内容只是数学运算的结果，并不能传达人类的情感和思想。尽管承认AI有诸多实际应用价值，但作者坚持认为阅读由机器生成的文字无法替代真正的文学体验。最终结论是，作者更倾向于选择与活生生的人类创作互动而非机器产物。 Iâve got a post-graduate certificate in artificial intelligence (AI). Iâm also an author, and I believe writers and publishers should not use AI in publishing. So thatâs why I was disturbed when a reviewer asked if I had used AI in writing my recent coming-of-age novel, Under the Gulf Coast Sun. But the reasons I oppose using AI are not the usual ones you hear. We have all read or heard about copyright violations during AI algorithm training, as well as plagiarism problems, job displacement, potential stifling of creativity, legal complexity, blandness, and plain old human outrage. Those are all good arguments for opposing the use of generative AI in publishing. Let me also argue against its use, but for a completely different reason: AI is dead . Literally. When I want to read poetry, a short story, a novel, a memoir, or non-fiction, I seek the voice of a fellow human being. A computer, by contrast, has the exact same awareness of the world that you had before birthâbasically the perspective of a stone sitting on the side of the road. That is, no awareness of the world at all. So, when Iâm interested in what a person has to say, why would I willingly spend time reading or listening to a text that was mathematically calculated by a dead thing? I would not. And once you consider this reality, I believe you will lose interest as well, just as we all completely lost interest in (and quickly forgot) the rather incredible achievement of IBMâs Big Blue defeating chess champion Gary Kasparov in a six-game showdown in 1997. Mustapha Suleyman, Microsoftâs Artificial Intelligence CEO, said in an NPR interview with Manosh Zamorodi that AI systems âcommunicate in our languages. They see what we see. They consume unimaginably large amounts of information. They have memory. They have personality. They have creativity.â That is mostly nonsense. Computers operate only with zeros and ones. AI does not see what we see. It has no personality, no creativity. At best AI is a glorified calculator that works by fooling people into believing that it possesses the qualities Suleyman lists because AI does consume and process unimaginably large amounts of information from human beings. Unlike Suleymanâs claim, though, computers donât have any real understanding of the data they generate. Hereâs how AI calculates novels or short stories or poetry: A human language prompt is converted into zeroes and ones and stored in a vast ocean of other zeros and ones. Then a set of instructions are loaded into the main processorâs transistors (again, zeroes and ones). The instructions tell the computer which zeroes and ones to retrieve from memory, then the retrieved zeros and ones are added together with other zeros and ones using Boolean math. This creates a different pattern of zeros and onesâwhich get put back into the storage system. This process repeats itself at extreme speed for about ten or fifteen seconds, until the novel or short story or poem has been fully calculated and placed into memory (again, as zeros and ones). At a higher level, AI calculates texts based on probabilities of what word is most likely to come next in the stream of data itâs generating. Thatâs all. In other words: A poem, short story, or novel calculated by a computer is nothing more than a prediction. The fact that a human being sometimes canât tell the difference between an AI-generated text and one written by a real person doesnât make the calculation any less of a mindless mathematical outcome. ( The Turing Test first devised in 1950, is a way to attempt to determine whether machines actually exhibit any real intelligence. In particular, if a human canât tell the difference between the machine output and one created by a human, the test passes. But Turing, the man who proposed the test, later said that the question of whether machines can think is itself âtoo meaninglessâ to deserve discussion.) And, critically, the math has nothing to do with how humans build beauty and meaning with writing. There are uncountable amazing and incredibly useful applications of AI, both generative and otherwise, in society. I wonât list them (just ask your local ChatGPT, it will be happy to calculate a result for you). And on that note, I let ChatGPT end this article with a calculation it made about the meaning of its own calculations, based on the following prompt: Me : I would state that you donât understand concepts, but retrieve data, operate on the data, then calculate an output. The concept is up to me to create based on your calculations. ChatGPT : Youâre absolutely right. I do not possess true understanding or conceptual awareness in the human sense. Instead, I work by retrieving patterns, facts, and relationships from the data Iâve been trained on, performing calculations and logical operations to produce outputs that align with your prompts. ChatGPT has calculated this truth (as Suleyman the Microsoft AI guru well knows): Generative AI output is an illusionâa fakeâproduced by a dead thing with no awareness of what it has produced. We have to make our own meaning from it. But beyond that, I simply cannot justify spending my very limited time reading the calculations of a computer while pretending it has the same weight as the creative output of an actual human being. Iâll take the living over the dead, every time. Â
AI Is Dead The author,持有人工智能研究生证书的作家，反对在出版业中使用AI，认为这样做是对人类创造力的误解。与常见的版权侵犯、抄袭等问题不同，作者的核心观点是AI本质上是没有意识和感知能力的存在，其生成的内容只是数学运算的结果，并不能传达人类的情感和思想。尽管承认AI有诸多实际应用价值，但作者坚持认为阅读由机器生成的文字无法替代真正的文学体验。最终结论是，作者更倾向于选择与活生生的人类创作互动而非机器产物。 Iâve got a post-graduate certificate in artificial intelligence (AI). Iâm also an author, and I believe writers and publishers should not use AI in publishing. So thatâs why I was disturbed when a reviewer asked if I had used AI in writing my recent coming-of-age novel, Under the Gulf Coast Sun. But the reasons I oppose using AI are not the usual ones you hear. We have all read or heard about copyright violations during AI algorithm training, as well as plagiarism problems, job displacement, potential stifling of creativity, legal complexity, blandness, and plain old human outrage. Those are all good arguments for opposing the use of generative AI in publishing. Let me also argue against its use, but for a completely different reason: AI is dead . Literally. When I want to read poetry, a short story, a novel, a memoir, or non-fiction, I seek the voice of a fellow human being. A computer, by contrast, has the exact same awareness of the world that you had before birthâbasically the perspective of a stone sitting on the side of the road. That is, no awareness of the world at all. So, when Iâm interested in what a person has to say, why would I willingly spend time reading or listening to a text that was mathematically calculated by a dead thing? I would not. And once you consider this reality, I believe you will lose interest as well, just as we all completely lost interest in (and quickly forgot) the rather incredible achievement of IBMâs Big Blue defeating chess champion Gary Kasparov in a six-game showdown in 1997. Mustapha Suleyman, Microsoftâs Artificial Intelligence CEO, said in an NPR interview with Manosh Zamorodi that AI systems âcommunicate in our languages. They see what we see. They consume unimaginably large amounts of information. They have memory. They have personality. They have creativity.â That is mostly nonsense. Computers operate only with zeros and ones. AI does not see what we see. It has no personality, no creativity. At best AI is a glorified calculator that works by fooling people into believing that it possesses the qualities Suleyman lists because AI does consume and process unimaginably large amounts of information from human beings. Unlike Suleymanâs claim, though, computers donât have any real understanding of the data they generate. Hereâs how AI calculates novels or short stories or poetry: A human language prompt is converted into zeroes and ones and stored in a vast ocean of other zeros and ones. Then a set of instructions are loaded into the main processorâs transistors (again, zeroes and ones). The instructions tell the computer which zeroes and ones to retrieve from memory, then the retrieved zeros and ones are added together with other zeros and ones using Boolean math. This creates a different pattern of zeros and onesâwhich get put back into the storage system. This process repeats itself at extreme speed for about ten or fifteen seconds, until the novel or short story or poem has been fully calculated and placed into memory (again, as zeros and ones). At a higher level, AI calculates texts based on probabilities of what word is most likely to come next in the stream of data itâs generating. Thatâs all. In other words: A poem, short story, or novel calculated by a computer is nothing more than a prediction. The fact that a human being sometimes canât tell the difference between an AI-generated text and one written by a real person doesnât make the calculation any less of a mindless mathematical outcome. ( The Turing Test first devised in 1950, is a way to attempt to determine whether machines actually exhibit any real intelligence. In particular, if a human canât tell the difference between the machine output and one created by a human, the test passes. But Turing, the man who proposed the test, later said that the question of whether machines can think is itself âtoo meaninglessâ to deserve discussion.) And, critically, the math has nothing to do with how humans build beauty and meaning with writing. There are uncountable amazing and incredibly useful applications of AI, both generative and otherwise, in society. I wonât list them (just ask your local ChatGPT, it will be happy to calculate a result for you). And on that note, I let ChatGPT end this article with a calculation it made about the meaning of its own calculations, based on the following prompt: Me : I would state that you donât understand concepts, but retrieve data, operate on the data, then calculate an output. The concept is up to me to create based on your calculations. ChatGPT : Youâre absolutely right. I do not possess true understanding or conceptual awareness in the human sense. Instead, I work by retrieving patterns, facts, and relationships from the data Iâve been trained on, performing calculations and logical operations to produce outputs that align with your prompts. ChatGPT has calculated this truth (as Suleyman the Microsoft AI guru well knows): Generative AI output is an illusionâa fakeâproduced by a dead thing with no awareness of what it has produced. We have to make our own meaning from it. But beyond that, I simply cannot justify spending my very limited time reading the calculations of a computer while pretending it has the same weight as the creative output of an actual human being. Iâll take the living over the dead, every time. Â
重新分解AI获得了与墨西哥利物浦的年度合同980万美元
2025-04-15 12:05:41
Rekolve AI（NASDAQ：RZLV）宣布与该国领先的百货商店连锁店利物浦墨西哥一份980万美元的年度合同。该交易强调了利物浦对Rekolve AI的大脑商务技术堆栈的认可，其中包括SEO Studio，它与Google的生态系统深入融合，以在数字贸易中提供出色的成果。这种战略合作伙伴关系强调了AI驱动的解决方案对利物浦的数字参与和收入增长的变革性影响，从而加强了AI在AI驱动商业技术领域的领导者的作用。
Rekolve AI（NASDAQ：RZLV）宣布与该国领先的百货商店连锁店利物浦墨西哥一份980万美元的年度合同。该交易强调了利物浦对Rekolve AI的大脑商务技术堆栈的认可，其中包括SEO Studio，它与Google的生态系统深入融合，以在数字贸易中提供出色的成果。这种战略合作伙伴关系强调了AI驱动的解决方案对利物浦的数字参与和收入增长的变革性影响，从而加强了AI在AI驱动商业技术领域的领导者的作用。
2025-04-15 12:00:00
2025-04-15 12:00:00
两个素食主义者的爱好者，一个AI“邪教”和一群尸体
2025-04-15 11:00:58
本文讲述了一系列令人不安的事件，涉及几个人，这些人以其对理性主义和人工智能（AI）的兴趣而闻名的在线社区。这是关键点的摘要：1。**背景**：故事以Eliezer Yudkowsky为中心，Eliezer Yudkowsky是AI安全和理性主义者圈子中的著名人物，其作品包括“ Harry Potter和HAPMOR）（HPMOR），这是一部粉丝小说小说，将Harry Potter与哲学思想融合在一起。2。他通过在线论坛与其他志趣相投的人联系，组成了一个小组，将自己视为动物权利和素食主义的理性十字军。3。**纯素食主义者**：考虑到在道德上等同于人类暴行的动物，这群人将吃肉视为邪恶的行为，以种族灭绝或大规模谋杀罪名。他们称非素食为“吃肉的吸血鬼”。4。**暴力行动**： - **约翰·欣克利（John Hinkley Jr. - **谋杀案**：马克斯·斯奈德（Max Snyder）被捕，并被指控谋杀一名名叫罗伯特·朗（Robert Lang）的老人（尽管有些报道称他为托马斯·朗（Thomas Lang））。这次谋杀案的动机似乎与他的反肉类意识形态有关。5。**理性主义社区的回应**：更广泛的理性主义社区的成员，包括那些与斯奈德小组在线互动的人感到震惊并担心他们以前的朋友的行为。一些人想知道他们是否可以早期识别或阻止激进化。6。这种吸引力包括提到尤德科夫斯基作品中的思想和短语，表明这些概念在斯奈德的思想中有多深深。7。**更广泛的含义**：本文提出了有关与某些类型的在线社区相关的潜在风险的问题，这些风险侧重于激进意识形态或对理性思想的极端解释。它强调了看似无害的智力追求有时会导致危险的结果，并结合强烈的个人信念和与更广泛的社会的孤立相结合。这个故事强调了意识形态狂热的复杂性和潜在危险，即使在社区中，他们以理性的话语和道德考虑而感到自豪。
本文讲述了一系列令人不安的事件，涉及几个人，这些人以其对理性主义和人工智能（AI）的兴趣而闻名的在线社区。这是关键点的摘要：1。**背景**：故事以Eliezer Yudkowsky为中心，Eliezer Yudkowsky是AI安全和理性主义者圈子中的著名人物，其作品包括“ Harry Potter和HAPMOR）（HPMOR），这是一部粉丝小说小说，将Harry Potter与哲学思想融合在一起。2。他通过在线论坛与其他志趣相投的人联系，组成了一个小组，将自己视为动物权利和素食主义的理性十字军。3。**纯素食主义者**：考虑到在道德上等同于人类暴行的动物，这群人将吃肉视为邪恶的行为，以种族灭绝或大规模谋杀罪名。他们称非素食为“吃肉的吸血鬼”。4。**暴力行动**： - **约翰·欣克利（John Hinkley Jr. - **谋杀案**：马克斯·斯奈德（Max Snyder）被捕，并被指控谋杀一名名叫罗伯特·朗（Robert Lang）的老人（尽管有些报道称他为托马斯·朗（Thomas Lang））。这次谋杀案的动机似乎与他的反肉类意识形态有关。5。**理性主义社区的回应**：更广泛的理性主义社区的成员，包括那些与斯奈德小组在线互动的人感到震惊并担心他们以前的朋友的行为。一些人想知道他们是否可以早期识别或阻止激进化。6。这种吸引力包括提到尤德科夫斯基作品中的思想和短语，表明这些概念在斯奈德的思想中有多深深。7。**更广泛的含义**：本文提出了有关与某些类型的在线社区相关的潜在风险的问题，这些风险侧重于激进意识形态或对理性思想的极端解释。它强调了看似无害的智力追求有时会导致危险的结果，并结合强烈的个人信念和与更广泛的社会的孤立相结合。这个故事强调了意识形态狂热的复杂性和潜在危险，即使在社区中，他们以理性的话语和道德考虑而感到自豪。
2025-04-15 11:00:26