the the . ringback the pulling off the top $500.00 companies in the united states. now see all sufficient intelligence is posing potential risk. that's a 5 fold increase in just 2 years. according to a new survey assembly, the technology could become a threat to that businesses. so what's driving the space is, this is inside store the color that on chains phase all sufficient intelligence was wants to stuff of science fiction, but now it's positive and life. lots of us might not know it, but i always found in activities including health care and mobile phones,

manufacturing, transport road vehicles and entertainment, to name only a few areas with whom you might find these in a washing machine or cooking appliances. seen as a revolution by something that could change our lives, the, from the federal bud. susie, as an for artificial intelligence, just a couple of years ago, is however, giving way to raising concerns among businesses over the risk that poses the findings come from a study by a rise, a uh, using the annual report. so the $500.00, the largest companies in the us, many of which operate around the world in 2020 to 9 percent of the biggest us companies. psyche the artificial intelligence as a concern. but now molden haul for wary of a i and see it as a potential risk. some industries and more wired than others. well, the 90 percent of us media and entertainment companies view it as a threat, software and technology, telecommunications, health care, and financial services also show higher levels of concern than other sectors. the

company's concerns of wide ranging some concerns about confidential information that could be accessed the link by employees, others via new levels of government, regulation to cope with a rapidly evolving technology and others fear losing out to competitors with better technology. 2 thirds of firms surveyed c generative a all the technology that can produce text, images, audio and videos is a risk that follows a boom and predictive machine learning technology during the past 2 years. off of the launch of chat, c, p t. but some sectors of teen on adopting a i and see it has a benefit. they include the automotive energy and manufacturing industries. the, well, let's discuss all of this now with all gas in geneva, we have adrian monk, senior advisor on a on technology. and the long time managing director of the world economic forum in dublin lane book is

a science and technology journalist who hopes the pub cost full text psych and in manchester. carrie cooper is a professor of organizational psychology and health at the university of manchester and president of c. i. p. d, the you case professional body for human resources and people development. welcome to all of you and thank you for joining us on this edition of inside story. i want to talk about what these big firms think about or in a moment. but let's just talk about our a, our in general, and how much of a revolution it is. i didn't put this into some historical context. compare this, for example, with the both the internet to going back even further. the industrial revolution. how big a deal is a i think i is going to be a very big deal. but, you know, there are a lot of cities out the if you're to pull credit, the nobel prize winning economist, you know, he said the impacts of the internet was going to be less than that of a fax machine. so there's a lot of people out there who actually brought a cynical about he started technology development,

but i saying i realize due to be a numerous boon and an incredible leap from technology. for folks who haven't been in the technology games, who can come in and bring great news stuff to it. and if you look at regions really well set for that regions with big energy capabilities of the like the middle east . and they're in great shape for benefiting from a technology like called special intelligence, which needs a lot of energy. so elaine, the same question to you, compare it with them some 3 decades ago. the both of the internet is a i, as big a deal. i definitely feels that way in the current context and it's hard to think what we were thinking retrospect, but i do think we, we probably will quite soon get to a phase where it's ordinary to be using a tool like this. and it's actually kind of boring and maybe even a bit tedious. the way things that would have seemed remarkable at their time, like email, have to come today and i think that will be the real sign of it's in durance as a general purpose. technology is when it becomes every day and actually that's

exciting. can you tell us what your take on this to think the public to of got that heads around what i could do yet? no, i don't think the probably cabinet at all. i think it is a big deal, but guess what? i mean a guy has been going on for a long time. law firms use it to read contracts. it's everywhere. so it's, it's been around for the last 5 years. in any case, i think we're, as i think the general public and businesses even themselves don't have this view that it's going to be some transformative thing. so transformative, i think adrian illustrated that by saying, i mean probably they think it's, it's like the introduction of the computer. that's the fundamental. but actually a i has being is already being used. funny enough, i think more have to slicing all of the products potential negatives around that and concentrating on the potential positives and how we're going to manage the process. are you doing?

i'm talking about this report from this group arise, but i've also been looking at some other recent research by the management consultants. mckinsey saying that a, i could add to the global comment only between $2.00 trillion and $4.00 trillion dollars annually. and the report goes on to say this, it seems possible that within the next 3 years. ready is that's a pretty short timeline, and the thing not connected to a, uh, it will be considered obsolete or ineffective. i mean, that sounds like hype. and i think when you look at any professional services report, you're going to see a lot more hype. because these are marketing documents, marketing ways of professional services, folks who want to come in and help companies with those transitions that tool key math. but, you know, there is an incredible opportunity here for all space with intelligence technology, you know, natural language processing, machine learning, all of these things to come in and transform processes. and some of the people i'm talking to a very, very straightforward manufacturing businesses,

which used to have to do things like check. well, their products were coming off the line. they just sold out specialists intelligence technology can actually do what used to take them hours and days in microseconds. so potentially what mackenzie's talking about a very real games, but very ordinary businesses that can really make a huge difference to that process. is elaine and we were talking and comparing this to the both of the internet, remember back then that was the dot com bubble and then there was a crash. do you have any worries? yeah, i think there's a lot of concern at the moment that this is a bit of approval and even those projections that you mentioned, they may be born and simply because there's a lot of vested interests that need to see i succeed because so much improved interest and even what it's being tipped to service people for in the media and most of the time are and perhaps the things that will be most effective at like asian mentioned how it can be useful in manufacturing. that's not really getting the most media coverage. they're most to talking about content gratian,

things like customer service and marketing. and i do find that you may also see a pivot when it becomes actual business to differentiate or that you have a human touch that you don't rely on the systems that you pride yourself on having actual people that your clients and customers can attractive to solve their problems that could actually end up being becoming a business gain, because sometimes you switch these systems to fervently. they are ins as successful as what you would have gotten. maybe if they were assisting your human workers. or if you've had human workers in boston to start, well, all of you, adrian seemed to think that a, uh, is a very, very big deal. explain to me then what you make of this. so they arise uh they were talking about today, which is the fortune $500.00 companies, something is they seem to be some of them, a bit freaked out to about the prospect's why. i think when you look at this report, and by the way, it's probably generated by a light technology itself looking through all of these different reports. but when

you look at the kind of concerns, companies have initially with any technology, there's a great excitement. there's a great sense that this is going to transform our business. we can make something of it. and then company start to look at the costs of implementations. they look at cyber security issues. they have technology teams who tell them that this is not something that can be seamlessly integrated with our existing technology stacks. so all of that kind of concerns the been bubbled up behind the enthusiasm coming to the for i think with a all i were that phase of the kind of tub of adoption, where people are starting to know that they've got to get to grips with it. but they don't really know what exactly they go to do to put it in place. and remember, going back to the adult calm blue when i was a young and be a student the business go. you know, we were told that that'd be normal. call show rooms that will book shops. it was the book deal assuming everybody today was jeff bezos. there's a lot of outside companies right now, who's going to come into the space of people and by the people that roys have been

looking at. and those going to be the companies i think that we're going to see taking on a item, bringing it to the next level to carry though, when normally there is new technology, new innovations which can cut jobs and increase profits. corporations normally embrace it. what do you think about the caution at this moment? i'm quite interested in this report because normally it's the employees who are very worried about it. and yet, so the surveys are showing the employees are concerned about it, but they also think that it has potential for them because it couldn't make the dollar parts of their job eliminate the don't parts of the job and provided added value. so i'm quite surprised that companies are all worried about normally it's companies saying, come on, let's do this. let's go and they're worried about how the employees are going to adapt to it. i think the opposite of this happening now, because i think employees want more look at a lot of people are always fearful of change. technology. people are always sweet,

they're going to lose their jobs. every technological innovation has it has a transition point where people actually. ready the job changes, but actually what ends up happening is they do different things and usually morales values based things that are more exciting, more interesting, and the less adult. so employees funny, i know from my experience in the u. k. is employees have been bracelets a bit, you know, but they're still unsure because i'm not quite sure what this band thing is. what do you say? i don't know what, what potentially kind of do for me. but they're seeing some benefits that already actually. but a lot of this i, in my view, has to do with how this a guy is managing the organization. and if it's not managed properly, then you're going to have problems to elaine. this report is about the fortune 500 companies. are the biggest companies in the united states. could it be that these

all the biggest companies in the world and they have the most to lose potentially. whereas small a lead the companies maybe don't have the same lawyers or the bigger companies can probably ride the way more successfully. we've even seen the missteps of some of the leaders in the space and they have survived them. the reason why we no longer talk that single buyers is because have to be re branded as gemini, because google made so many mistakes. and the launch is that is that we're quite embarrassing for the company, but it has written bodies. and i do think i carry makes a good points for like what are we talking about? we talk but a i, this report is compared to a 2022 reports where there was only 9 percent concern. raise that amongst these companies when it came to a guy. and that proceeds the release of the generative. they are systems that we're now familiar with, they're not getting a lot of coverage. so it seems to be a generous of a i as a form of a, i'm particular not necessarily automation, not even necessarily things like computer vision, which would be very useful in the manufacturing space. the agent mentioned, it's the generous today i, that seems to cause

a lot of concern under our last question marks on knowns about gender survey. i am the risk that it brings to a business even on what has been trained dog, and whether that's going to be decided as being a breach of copyright breach of intellectual property off the content that's of both of those models. and then it's also who owns the models because what's emerging now is that we have some key players that have some quite powerful, large language models that are then being used by other companies. some startups have built entire businesses on someone else as model. and if the access changes for some reason or if you to the price of the access changes that could destroy a small company, but still starting to play around to the space. and what we're seeing come up is the idea of large language models as a service. the way we've seen software as a service become as a popular business at some sector as well. to adrian, this have a little bit of contacts and history from you. i mean, when there is disruption in, in business, the biggest companies struggle with state, the biggest companies, notable example,

postal competing revolution. the 1980s, the biggest name and computers then was ibm. all we have one of those moments with the big companies, not all of them are going to stay the big companies. i think we all potentially one of those moments. i think what's interesting is nobody knows with those kind of things are going to come from to go back to the don't have search. for example. there was northern lights out. it's a visa, probably fault a dozen other things, yahoo, etc. which will going to be coming, creating search technology, and then suddenly out of nowhere out of stanford come to google couple guys and they funds form and its hard industry. in fact create one with their instruments. now, you know, that is where we 10, surely over right now we, they all have technologies, but we haven't gotten the outline yet of where that innovation is going to come from. but the potential is definitely the and the 2 things that technology needs. it needs the chips and it needs the imagery. and if you can put those 2 things together in a meaningful cost effective way,

then potentially you can come in and start to really, really make a difference. lots of different from back in the, of the 1000 don't update those checks and have regulated access to them is highly regulated and also energy. you know, energy is not something that you can just turn on. so i know it's something that is a huge global results. the basically requires incredible infrastructure of incredible results richness to provide. and if you've got those kind of things and for example, the middle east has them. absolutely. then you potentially in a good position to disrupt. i'm really make a difference in his face, and you can see players like that, bobby lumpkin bike, like saudi arabia coming in. i'm really investing here and they've been to actually have an opportunity to make a real difference in this space. let's look at this report. some of the specific things that companies say they were worried about in a i carry motorola. the,

the to come from says a mike may not always operate as intended. and data sets may be in sufficient to contain illegal bias home for or offensive information. i'm a are those currently as it operates, makes mistakes. i think they call them hallucinations. a fish. i like that is a psychologist. i certainly like that. look at, i mean sure. all technologies have downsides to them. i think there's a lot of fear around. there's always been about the fear, whether it's no matter what it's been, that seems fair about the internet. ah, the intrusiveness, looking for the privacy issues on the internet. this has always happened for me. it's all about how do we embrace it? how do we get our people together? how do we openly discuss it with, with our employees and think of the benefits that we can achieve? and i think that, so an issue i'm more worried about is that the organizational psychology is how to

create the right kind of culture to work with our employees, to think of its benefits and not, and potentially the risks that won't be risk, lose all technology. and we have to, we have to look at those risks and see how we can circumvent them and how we can actually do things, go, listen, this is not going to go away. and the future is going to be with a i've, incidentally, where did it start? and if you look at the chat g, b, t, that wasn't started with organizations that started with individuals, they embraced it. that's probably why they're less negative a product than the employer seems to be. what the employer will benefit from this if they set up a good psychological contract with their employees and figure a way through how, what, what will be the benefits are in what kind of a a. all right. and what would potentially be the risk and how do we minimize those risk? not a problem. i don't, this is our future, ma'am. we can't,

we can't ignore it. and we can say, well, we can't do it for those reasons, but let's mitigate the risks. on the line, something else. and therefore, disney the begins taming company. williams. the rules governing new technology developments remain on the settled. i mean, we don't have rules, we don't have regulation yet, and this is moving so fast. and yes, if you're going to have some sort of international agreement, the wheels of international diplomacy move so slow today is a big problem here, isn't that? yeah, now we're moving faster here in the you, in the, in the this month, the area to visually starts at a ticking clock essentially until august next year. and they expect a certain level of compliance with the act. so what happens there remains to be seen, but it is, you know, taking place there is regulation in place for the systems that for general purpose . i, but i do think a company like disney will have to use concerns about those issues. i raised friends and sexual property especially considering all this past weekend. the grok

a on model was used to produce images of mickey megs doing things that disney would never like to see make a mess associated with. and that's something that look to just company like disney, i'm sure we'll have great issues with and it shows when the systems are built with those guard rails and faced up, you know, other systems don't to leverage, make images like that. but this one did, it shows that is, is possible quite simply at, depending on who is developing the model and what it's allowed to do. but i do think in not context, people are fearful of this and not because of the natural inclination to fear and change, which i don't disagree with that that is a true thing. but also we're dealing with a much more tech savvy populace at this stage as well that we were dealing with the advent of things like at computing. and the early days that the internet and there are people and from the workforce. so they've never known a world without the internet. there are a lot more to didn't affect the stuff. i think they're not more savvy, and i think they're more cautious because of the things that have gone before we have see now what's happening with the problems and lack of me at regulations when it comes to social media. what has transpired there because of industry was allowed

to grow at a great rate without anyone coming in and putting rains on it, putting safe guards in place. so things that are cautious, the i taking that same um bruce at instead of becoming so, and that is our lives for every so often thought about at what cost as well as things like the disinformation of misinformation, problems that stand from generously i. there are those energy costs that were raised by an agent as well. so do we want the systems that are costing the earth? just so people can make funny many images with becky mace, or do we want them to be doing productive things in terms of health care, energy management, and things like that. and that's another thing that people are more concerned with . now they are more time a conscious, and they are more conscious consumers generally. and so adrian, if we do want something that is productive and beneficial for humanity, how do you regulate a i and how do you get this done quickly given this is moving so far, austin, hey, i quite literally as we speak is still being constantly invented. yeah. i mean, if a on innovation moves at the speed of lawyers, them, we're in for

a very slow journey of innovation. i think the reality is that there's been a lot of lessons from the way technologies rolled out and government some more interesting things like agile regulation, which is something that the world are coming for them as a lot of experience with. but the idea that you regulate alongside the companies producing that you get them involved in discussions early and that you actually have a dialogue with them and the relevant bodies. because the old days of having a ton of, you know, expands national only regulate free system all. well, the united, the airline industry doesn't roll like that. a lot of other industries, connell prate in that kind of framework, and it's no different. so i think we need a very different power, though. i'm looking at a like regulation, but there are examples we can go wrong and i think, you know, with, with where the industry is right now. probably the play is exist and the interest exist. those conversations to start and governments like the korean government and

seeing saudi arabian government, meaning people, you've also seen the british government and the french government. i think those kind of governments getting behind some id or what the next phase of, of a or regulation looks like. it's going to be very helpful. kerry we've been talking, you mentioned was earlier when we talk you mainly about companies in this. what about individual workers? how worried should they be and how bar it should take? unions, for example, be about about people losing that jobs. people be mess unemployment in some sexes. yeah, they are worried. i mean, the unions are worried. i think the individuals are potentially less worried, strangely enough, in this technology looks at they'll be some who will be very worried. well, it will replace my job. but the history shows that all these technologies actually be in the and create jobs. there is a transition period. absolutely for sure, for jobs change and aspects of your job disappear and a i will pay to come over, but it will enable you to do other things. and i,

i think the trait units will be very worried about this, about the major job last, hey, we've heard this all along with the computer 1st came, oh my god, everybody's gonna lose their job. you know, i don't remember i'm that old. i remember when harold wilson, when i 1st came to the u. k, do you have to break sheet of technology speech? in 1964, reset by the technology is going to take our lives over by the year 2000. we're going to be working 15 hour weeks. we will need people cuz technology will take over. that hasn't happened. we're actually working longer hours than we did in 1964 . so the, i think the evidence is dropped will change. yes. people won't lose their jobs, but if they embrace it, and if, if management is collab or not to engage people, develop a good psychological on contract work for their people to enable them to do better and do different kinds of work. are there will be

a problem. trade unions will certainly react to this and the are already concerned about it. but you know, this is what change produces a lot. and then they'll be people watching this or a little while, right. who should be worried about losing that? jobs, which sectors do you think or do you think a good example of the kind of collective auctions roll and this was at the writers strike at of the states which they did negotiate a contract about the use of a i being something that would empower them as opposed to disempower them, but i think that was a really good example to follow. but there's, there's lots of this kind of whatever report you look at, there seems to be no limit to the job risks that exist inherently in a i, because it seems to be such a flexible technology that can do bits and pieces of a lot of things that law office with do and are takes a life unless you are someone who specifically works with things hands on at that you're like a trades person working with things like plumbing and, and construction. and that kind of thing. desk workers are probably at the highest risk here,

depending on the various things that they do in their day to day jobs. and we are seeing layoffs. i mean, last year was a significant here for layoffs, but, and it's down of a 40 percent this year. but is this still been over a $130000.00 job a us this year so far? so it's still going to be probably the 2nd tires here for layoffs. and what is happening that's quite interesting is there seems to be intern, job loss period, that it's not necessarily that you're losing your job to an ally that's replacing respond to you. but actually you're using your job to increase investment today. i because this is a great expense for these businesses and they need to have data centers to at run these things. they need support all the investments of the energy to run the data and all this costs money. and they're taking a risk that they are going to lose their human capital and invested into those other cost per projects. instead, it's adrian with this up people and change in some people, maybe having to change jobs is, has a potential headache for governments around the world as well. we have never been good at helping people transition from industry to industry. if you look at the u.

k. for example, when it's shut down the money industry, it basically pushed deeper into disability and sickness benefits. if you look at other kind of big foundations historically in the beginning of the industrial revolution, you know, a lot of people left behind. and we've seen in places like detroit in an industrial waste lands in, in heavy industries, centers across the, as well as the economies that we really haven't go a very good system in place to shifting people from good jobs in industry that are being hit by any technology, so governments of really, really good thing called about how they manage this transitions because people don't want to leave behind the jobs, the starting right at the bottom of the, of the tree in terms of the next career. so how can we help people re scale and shipped across the levels of pay and seeing your receipts that actually help them feel valued and not feel like this technology is coming in, destroying that lives reaching handbook with the rubbishing? is elaine that seems to be one problem, which is probably good for the people involved, but there seems to be

a shortage of a i x books. companies are struggling to find people who have the right expertise, and they will want to work on building new models rather than working for accountants. so banks. yeah. and they really are getting screwed up. if you look at the percentages of the ph. d. candidates in a i being skipped to find the big tech companies alone. i think it's something like 3 quarters of them. i've ended up in roles and those kind of companies as opposed to even sitting on an academia building at maybe tools and services that could be put to produce when it comes to on benefits. we continue from it. so there's a lot of concern there, and even in terms of a i restart, it's becoming increasingly dominated by research that's coming directly from a company and obviously in line with their agenda or in some way an academic industry collaboration where uh, both parties are involved in the research there is there's less percentage of the research coming surety from academia, which is also a cause for concern here because you don't want at the science behind this and the

messaging to be completely coopted by commercial and trust. ok, thank you very much to old 3 of our guests today. adrian monk, elaine book and kerry cooper. a fascinating discussion. if you came to the show light, you can find it again on our website, which is 0 dot com. what should we discuss next time on the program? we want to hear from you go to a facebook page, that's facebook dot com, forward slash h a inside story, or message or tags on x, y at h, a inside story from all the team here in doha, stay safe on checking space. and i'll see you back here very soon, bye bye for now. the mm hm. i think the global system is broke. therefore the system does not solve itself. we're going to have to find new ways. we do not need fossil fuel. the 2nd is people knowing what to do, the saving,

consciously do the right things that will help us solve this problem. not by knowing everybody else submits enough to one. so there's a false expectation, particularly among rich people, that they can survive every day. even rich people are going to be affected by the impacts of climate change and they're going to have to settle fish. behavior is what got us into this problem. and surface behavior will not get us out of this from the the,

[000:00:00;00] the low on money in sight. this is a new sound live from coming up in the next 60 minutes in a very constructive meeting with subprime, mister netanyahu today. he confirmed to me that his real accepts the bridge and pulse was we had that and us actually are state says israel has accepted and bridging ceased by proposal and calls on how most to do the same. is there any strong skill, 9 people in all the saucy refuge account bringing the total number of dead in golf