UK Government’s Approach to Google Deemed “Dangerously Naive” by Campaigner

Google has struck a significant agreement with the UK government to supply complimentary technology to various public sector entities, ranging from the NHS to local councils.

US corporations are being called upon to “upskill” tens of thousands of civil servants in technology, including the application of artificial intelligence, as part of a deal that doesn’t necessitate payment from the government. Whitehall is set to enhance its collaboration with Google as public services evolve.

However, this arrangement has raised alarms about the potential risks to UK public data that could be housed on US servers, particularly in light of Donald Trump’s erratic leadership.

The Department of Science and Innovation Technology (DSIT) stated that Google Cloud, known for its databases, machine learning, and computing capabilities, “has agreed to assist public services in leveraging advanced technology to break free from outdated ‘ball and chain’ legacy contracts.”

Although Google’s offerings are believed to be more nimble and effective than those of traditional competitors, there are concerns within Whitehall’s digital circles that governments might become reliant on a new form of dependency.

Other American tech giants, including Microsoft, OpenAI, and Anthropic, are also providing services to civil servants as they look to harness technology to enhance the efficiency of financially constrained public services.

On Wednesday, Prime Minister Rachel Reeves convened with two senior members of Mark Zuckerberg’s team, Joel Kaplan, Meta’s top global affairs officer, and Nicola Mendelson, head of the global business group.

During the 2020 pandemic, Palantir, a high-tech firm founded by libertarian Trump supporter Peter Thiel, worked with the UK government for just £1 and secured a £330 million contract in 2023 to create a unified platform for NHS data.

DSIT also announced that Google DeepMind, the AI division helmed by Nobel Prize winner Demis Hassabis, will “partner with government tech experts to help implement and propagate new emerging technologies across the public sector, enhancing efficiency and driving scientific advancements.”

Nevertheless, ministers and regulatory bodies are grappling with crucial decisions on regulating AI, search, cloud computing, and copyright, as noted by Martha Dark, co-director of nonprofits advocating for fair technology use. The complexity of data sovereignty poses significant challenges, echoing concerns from Peter Kyle, the Secretary of Science and Technology.

Experts caution that this agreement could solidify the market dominance of companies like Google, placing the UK government in a position dependent on technology from major corporations. At a Google event in London on Wednesday, Kyle emphasized, “Whenever feasible, UK tech firms, whether large or small, will have equitable opportunities to win public technology contracts.”

According to sources within the government, the advantages gained by Google were not subjected to public bids as no financial exchange occurred. DSIT clarified, “These arrangements are fully compliant with all relevant public procurement regulations and may lead to future commercial agreements.”

As of the end of March, Kyle has engaged in 11 meetings with Google representatives since Labour took office.

The government affirmed that Google will not be allowed to train AI models using government data or access the data for other purposes. Additionally, data can only be stored abroad if adequate legal and security measures are established.

Google asserted that it retains control over where client content is stored and processed through partnerships with independent infrastructure providers, employing an “air gap” system for added protection.

Kyle remarked, “I aim to maximize the potential of the government-Google partnership and explore further collaborations with the UK’s AI lab, DeepMind, and my own AI developers.”

There are indications of new technologies that could enhance efficiency within the public sector. A recent examination of Microsoft’s AI Copilot tool revealed that 20,000 civil servants saved an average of 26 minutes each day, with 82% expressing a desire not to revert to previous work methods, as highlighted in a study.

However, Imogen Parker, Associate Director of the Ada Lovelace Institute, emphasized the necessity for public understanding regarding the benefits Google will derive from this partnership and what taxpayers might face in the coming years. “Deals like this may appear beneficial today, but there’s a risk of becoming locked in tomorrow, limiting options for future alternatives,” she cautioned.

Kyle has faced criticism for appearing too cozy with Big Tech. After being reported by the Guardian, he began a speech admitting he had likely engaged more with tech executives than his predecessor.

“I will never apologize for engaging with tech companies – that’s my role,” he stated, emphasizing the importance of ensuring children’s safety on social media, preparing the UK for advancements in AI, and securing better value from the significant sums spent on technology each year.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Could novelists concerned about the rise of AI be deemed classist and ableist? | Alwa Mahdawi

P
Think about artificial intelligence (AI) for a second. AI may not have emotions yet, but if it did, you’d be devastated by all the bad things people say about it. All it’s going to do is take our jobs and potentially destroy the world, yet people can’t stop being mean to it.

Evidence 1: A recent dispute with the organization behind National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo), an annual challenge to write a manuscript in one month. In a recent statement, NaNoWriMo wrote that it does not explicitly endorse or condemn methods of writing “including the use of AI.” Furthermore, “a blanket condemnation of artificial intelligence carries classist and ableist overtones…Questions about the use of AI are linked to questions about privilege.”

Um… what is it? AI is Working class Or did someone in management create ChatGPT and use the rhetoric of social justice to encourage them to defend the technology? Accused The act of stealing from artists and writers (training yourself with their work without compensation) is now The rich are richerThis strange statement Full of anger Four members of NaNoWriMo’s writers committee resigned in protest. When she resigned, bestselling author Maureen Johnson Encouraged other writers “Be careful: your work on their platform will almost certainly be used to train an AI.”

NaNoWriMo attempts damage control. A statement was issued Last week, the group said that the original wording was unclear (not ideal for a writing group) and that the group “does not believe that people who have concerns about AI are classist or ableist.” But many writers still seem wary of both the group and AI.

That should be enough. I am by no means anti-AI. It is clearly inappropriate to categorically condemn anything (apart from things like genocide). I believe that, properly guided, AI can enhance human creativity and improve society for everyone. On the other hand, I think the future of AI is in the hands of sociopathic technocrats who put profit first. We are currently in a “choose your own adventure” scenario with AI, and now it seems we are choosing the dystopian ending.

Arwa Mahdawi is a columnist for the Guardian.

  • Do you have any comments on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to email your response of 300 words or less for possible publication in our Letters section, please click here.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s $56 billion compensation for Tesla deemed excessive by judge

In a court filing on Tuesday, a Delaware judge ruled in favor of investors who contested Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package from Tesla, stating that it was excessive. The judge concluded that the compensation had been improperly established by Tesla’s board of directors and revoked it. If the decision is upheld in a potential appeal, Tesla’s board would need to create a new compensation plan for Musk.


Elon Musk responded on Twitter/X, saying, “Never incorporate a company in Delaware.”

Five years ago, Tesla shareholder Richard Tornetta filed a lawsuit accusing the company’s CEO, Elon Musk, of improperly directing negotiations on compensation packages and the board of directors lacking independence. The court’s decision directed Tornetta to cooperate with Musk’s legal team regarding the judge’s order, which can be appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court.

Musk’s compensation trial in November 2022 revealed that the money would be used to fund interplanetary travel. He testified, “This is how we’re going to get humans to Mars, so Tesla can help potentially achieve that.”

Tesla’s board argued that the package was necessary to keep Elon Musk committed to the electric car maker. The judge disagreed, noting that the defense failed to prove the need for such an unprecedented compensation plan. She instructed the parties to work on the final order implementing her decision.

The plaintiffs’ legal team also argued that the board had a duty to either reduce Musk’s salary or find another CEO and ensure that he worked full-time at Tesla instead of focusing on other projects.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Amit Batish of executive compensation research firm Equilar estimated in 2022 that Musk’s package was about six times the combined compensation of the 200 highest-paid executives in 2021.

In July, Tesla directors agreed to return $735 million to the company to settle shareholder claims that the company had overpaid in a separate lawsuit.

Source: www.theguardian.com