Technological advances always raise questions: about their benefits, costs, risks and ethics. And they require detailed, well-explained answers from the people behind them. It was for this reason that we launched our series of monthly Tech Exchange dialogues in February 2022.

Now, 18 months on, it has become clear that advances in one area of technology are raising more questions, and concerns, than any other: artificial intelligence. There are ever more people — scientists, software developers, policymakers, regulators — attempting answers.

Hence, the FT is launching AI Exchange, a new spin-off series of long-form dialogues.

Over the coming months, FT journalists will conduct in-depth interviews with those at the forefront of designing and safeguarding this rapidly evolving technology, to assess how the power of AI will affect our lives.

To give a flavour of what to expect, and the topics and arguments that will be covered, below we provide a selection of the most insightful AI discussions to date, from the original (and ongoing) Tech Exchange series.

They feature Aidan Gomez, co-founder of Cohere; Arvind Krishna, chief executive of IBM; Adam Selipsky, former head of Amazon Web Services; Andrew Ng, computer scientist and co-founder of Google Brain; and Helle Thorning-Schmidt, co-chair of Meta’s Oversight Board.

From October, AI Exchange will bring you the views of industry executives, investors, senior officials in government and regulatory authorities, as well as other specialists, to help assess what the future will hold.

If AI can replace labour, it’s a good thing

Arvind Krishna, chief executive IBM, and Richard Waters, west coast editor

Richard Waters: When you talk to businesses and CEOs and they ask ‘What do we do with this AI thing?’ What do you say to them?

Arvind Krishna: I always point to two or three areas, initially. One is anything around customer care, answering questions from people . . . it is a really important area where I believe we can have a much better answer at maybe around half the current cost. Over time, it can get even lower than half but it can take half out pretty quickly.

A second one is around internal processes. For example, every company of any size worries about promoting people, hiring people, moving people, and these have to be reasonably fair processes. But 90 per cent of the work involved in this is getting the information together. I think AI can do that and then a human can make the final decision. There are hundreds of such processes inside every enterprise, so I do think clerical white collar work is going to be able to be replaced by this.

If you think about most of the use cases I pointed out, they’re all about improving the productivity of an enterprise

Then, I think of regulatory work, whether it’s in the financial sector with audits, whether it’s in the healthcare sector. A big chunk of that could get automated using these techniques. Then I think there are the other use cases but they’re probably harder and a bit further out . . . things like drug discovery or in trying to finish up chemistry.

We do have a shortage of labour in the real world and that’s because of a demographic issue that the world is facing. So we have to have technologies that help . . . the United States is now sitting at 3.4 per cent unemployment, the lowest in 60 years. So maybe we can find tools that replace some portions of labour, and it’s a good thing this time.

RW: Do you think that we’re going to see winners and losers? And, if so, what’s going to distinguish the winners from the losers?

AK: There’s two spaces. There is business to consumer . . . then there are enterprises who are going to use these technologies. If you think about most of the use cases I pointed out, they’re all about improving the productivity of an enterprise. And the thing about improving productivity [is that enterprises] are left with more investment dollars for how they really advantage their products. Is it more R&D? is it better marketing? Is it better sales? Is it acquiring other things? . . . There’s lot of places to go spend that spare cash flow.

Read the full interview here

AI threat to human existence is ‘absurd’ distraction from real risks

Aidan Gomez, co-founder of Cohere, and George Hammond, venture capital correspondent

George Hammond: [We’re now at] the sharp end of the conversation around regulation in AI, so I’m interested in your view on whether there is a case — as [Elon] Musk and others have advocated — for stopping things for six months and trying to get a handle on it.

Aidan Gomez: I think the six-month pause letter is absurd. It is just categorically absurd . . . How would you implement a six-month clause practically? Who is pausing? And how do you enforce that? And how do we co-ordinate that globally? It makes no sense. The request is not plausibly implementable. So, that’s the first issue with it.

The second issue is the premise: there’s a lot of language in there talking about a superintelligent artificial general intelligence (AGI) emerging that can take over and render our species extinct; eliminate all humans. I think that’s a super-dangerous narrative. I think it’s irresponsible.

Debating whether our species is going to go extinct because of a takeover by a superintelligent AGI is an absurd use of our time

That’s really reckless and harmful and it preys on the general public’s fears because, for the better part of half a century, we’ve been creating media sci-fi around how AI could go wrong: Terminator-style bots and all these fears. So, we’re really preying on their fear.

GH: Are there any grounds for that fear? When we’re talking about . . . the development of AGI and a potential singularity moment, is it a technically feasible thing to happen, albeit improbable?

AG: I think it’s so exceptionally improbable. There are real risks with this technology. There are reasons to fear this technology, and who uses it, and how. So, to spend all of our time debating whether our species is going to go extinct because of a takeover by a superintelligent AGI is an absurd use of our time and the public’s mindspace.

We can now flood social media with accounts that are truly indistinguishable from a human, so extremely scalable bot farms can pump out a particular narrative. We need mitigation strategies for that. One of those is human verification — so we know which accounts are tied to an actual, living human being so that we can filter our feeds to only include the legitimate human beings who are participating in the conversation.

There are other major risks. We shouldn’t have reckless deployment of end-to-end medical advice coming from a bot without a doctor’s oversight. That should not happen.

So, I think there are real risks and there’s real room for regulation. I’m not anti-regulation, I’m actually quite in favour of it. But I would really hope that the public knows some of the more fantastical stories about risk [are unfounded]. They’re distractions from the conversations that should be going on.

Read the full interview here

There will not be one generative AI model to rule them all

Adam Selipsky, former head of Amazon Web Services, and Richard Waters, west coast editor

Richard Waters: What can you tell us about your own work on [generative AI and] large language models? How long have you been at it?

Adam Selipsky: We’re maybe three steps into a 10K race, and the question should not be, ‘Which runner is ahead three steps into the race?’, but ‘What does the course look like? What are the rules of the race going to be? Where are we trying to get to in this race?’

If you and I were sitting around in 1996 and one of us asked, ‘Who’s the internet company going to be?’, it would be a silly question. But that’s what you hear . . . ‘Who’s the winner going to be in this [AI] space?’

Generative AI is going to be a foundational set of technologies for years, maybe decades to come. And nobody knows if the winning technologies have even been invented yet, or if the winning companies have even been formed yet.

Generative AI is going to be a foundational set of technologies for years, maybe decades to come. And nobody knows if the winning technologies have even been invented yet

So what customers need is choice. They need to be able to experiment. There will not be one model to rule them all. That is a preposterous proposition.

Companies will figure out that, for this use case, this model’s best; for that use case, another model’s best . . . That choice is going to be incredibly important.

The second concept that’s critically important in this middle layer is security and privacy . . . A lot of the initial efforts out there launched without this concept of security and privacy. As a result, I’ve talked to at least 10 Fortune 1000 CIOs who have banned ChatGPT from their enterprises because they’re so scared about their company data going out over the internet and becoming public — or improving the models of their competitors.

RW: I remember, in the early days of search engines, when there was a prediction we’d get many specialised search engines . . . for different purposes, but it ended up that one search engine ruled them all. So, might we end up with two or three big [large language] models?

AS: The most likely scenario — given that there are thousands or maybe tens of thousands of different applications and use cases for generative AI — is that there will be multiple winners. Again, if you think of the internet, there’s not one winner in the internet.

Read the full interview here

Do we think the world is better off with more or less intelligence?

Andrew Ng, computer scientist and co-founder of Google Brain, and Ryan McMorrow, deputy Beijing bureau chief

Ryan McMorrow: In October [2023], the White House issued an executive order intended to increase government oversight of AI. Has it gone too far?

Andrew Ng: I think that we’ve taken a dangerous step . . . With various government agencies tasked with dreaming up additional hurdles for AI development, I think we’re on the path to stifling innovation and putting in place very anti-competitive regulations. 

Having more intelligence in the world, be it human or artificial, will help all of us better solve problems

We know that today’s supercomputer is tomorrow’s smartwatch, so as start-ups scale and as more compute [processing power] becomes pervasive, we’ll see more and more organisations run up against this threshold. Setting a compute threshold makes as much sense to me as saying that a device that uses more than 50 watts is systematically more dangerous than a device that uses only 10W: while it may be true, it is a very naive way to measure risk.

RM: What would be a better way to measure risk? If we’re not using compute as the threshold?

Throwing up regulatory barriers against the rise of intelligence, just because it could be used for some nefarious purposes . . . would set back society

AN: When we look at applications, we can understand what it means for something to be safe or dangerous and can regulate it properly there. The problem with regulating the technology layer is that, because the technology is used for so many things, regulating it just slows down technological progress. 

At the heart of it is this question: do we think the world is better off with more or less intelligence? And it is true that intelligence now comprises both human intelligence and artificial intelligence. And it is absolutely true that intelligence can be used for nefarious purposes.

But over many centuries, society has developed as humans have become better educated and smarter. I think that having more intelligence in the world, be it human or artificial, will help all of us better solve problems. So throwing up regulatory barriers against the rise of intelligence, just because it could be used for some nefarious purposes, I think would set back society.

Read the full interview here

‘Not all AI-generated content is harmful’

Helle Thorning-Schmidt, co-chair of Meta’s Oversight Board, and Murad Ahmed, technology news editor

Murad Ahmed: This is the year of elections. More than half of the world has gone to, or is going to, the polls. You’ve helped raise the alarm that this could also be the year that misinformation, particularly AI-generated deepfakes, could fracture democracy. We’re midway through the year. Have you seen that prophecy come to pass?

Helle Thorning-Schmidt: If you look at different countries, I think you’ll see a very mixed bag. What we’re seeing in India, for example, is that AI [deepfakes are] very widespread. Also in Pakistan it has been very widespread. [The technology is] being used to make people say something, even though they are dead. It’s making people speak, when they are in prison. It’s also making famous people back parties that they might not be backing . . . [But] If we look at the European elections, which, obviously, is something I observed very deeply, it doesn’t look like AI is distorting the elections. 

What we suggested to Meta is . . . they need to look at the harm and not just take something down because it is created by AI

What we suggested to Meta is . . . they need to look at the harm and not just take something down because it is created by AI. What we’ve also suggested to them is that they modernise their whole community standards on moderated content, and label AI-generated content so that people can see what they’re dealing with. That’s what we’ve been suggesting to Meta.

I do think we will change how Meta operates in this space. I think we will end up, after a couple of years, with Meta labelling AI content and also being better at finding signals of consent that they need to remove from the platforms, and doing it much faster. This is very difficult, of course, but they need a very good system. They also need human moderators with cultural knowledge who can help them do this. [Note: Meta started labelling content as “Made with AI” in May.]

Read the full interview here

A HUSBAND strangled, stabbed and bludgeoned his wife to death before taking his own life in a horrific murder suicide, an inquest heard.

Richard Parks, 63, and wife Suratchanee ‘Lat’ Parks, 53, were discovered inside their home in Tunbridge Wells, Kent.

4

An inquest heard how tree surgeon Parks had horror stab injuries to his neck and was found with a knife in his hand.

His nail bar worker wife was discovered in the bath with neck wounds consistent with being strangled, Kent Online reports.

Lat also had multiple knife injuries and had been bludgeoned with a hammer.

Pathologist Dr Virginia Fitzpatrick-Swallow told the court she had other injuries that suggested she had tried to fight her husband off.

The court was told the pair had met in Thailand where Lat already had a son and later moved to the UK.

They had recently bought a home in Lat’s native country and were hoping to retire there soon.

The couple’s marriage was described as “happy and without problems” but Parks had recently become anxious after receiving a large tax bill from HMRC.

He had also been “struggling with his mental health” and was forced to delay the move to Thailand, it was said.

On February 23, loved ones had gone to the three-storey home after growing concerned for the couple’s welfare.

Neighbours heard “hysterical” screams after they discovered Parks and Lat dead inside.

Police found blood stains in the kitchen, hallway, living room and on the stairs.

There was also a red folder on the floor that contained a large sum of cash, as well as a chainsaw and pruning saw in the bathroom.

Investigating officer Detective Constable Jessica Summers said police concluded there was no third party involvement.

Coroner Roger Hatch ruled that Lat was unlawfully killed and that her husband had taken his own life.

Parks’ brother Robert Parks said: “This is a terribly sad situation. Only those two will ever know exactly what happened.

“They loved each other very much and he was looking forward to going to Thailand – it’s just terribly sad for both families.”

If you are affected by any of the issues raised in this article, please call the Samaritans for free on 116123.

4

4

4

MANCHESTER United ace Harry Maguire stunned holidaymakers last month, when he showed up for a family break at a Haven holiday park in North Wales.

Despite being on £190,000 a week, he shunned the typical footie holidays of Dubai and Ibiza for Presthaven Beach Resort near Prestatyn – where 4-night holidays cost from £49.

5

5

Advertisement

5

Harry, 31, and his family, including wife Fern, stayed in a plush Diamond Lodge, costing from £495 for four nights, and enjoyed an action-packed few days doing things like swimming, roller skating and a high ropes course.

Like most other Brits, I was surprised to hear that a well-paid footie star stayed at a Haven holiday park, and couldn’t resist going down to copy his holiday – so last weekend my six-year-old daughter Mabel and I holidayed exactly like Harry Maguire.

Not only did we stay in a Diamond Lodge like the Man United star and his family, but we signed up for the same activities he did.

The caravan was definitely celeb-worthy. There was a huge marble kitchen with all the mod cons, as well as a matching bathroom and en-suite.

With hipster lighting, floor-to-ceiling windows and a 40-inch TV, it was nothing like the caravans of my childhood. I was shocked that you could even fit a giant corner sofa and eight-seater dining table inside.

And I felt a bit like a WAG doing my make-up over the matching his ‘n’ hers sinks in the chic en-suite the next morning.

Our first stop on Saturday was the Make-A-Bear class where a friendly instructor taught the kids how to create their own cuddly animal from Haven’s Seaside Squad. 

Mabel excitedly picked Annie the Elephant, then stuffed her tummy with foam, popped a pink heart inside and permanently fastened her zip.

It was a really cute session with games, singing and dancing.

Afterwards, we wandered up to the Creative Studio to paint a ceramic cup and a unicorn. They’re fired in the hot kiln each weekend and cooled just in time to be picked up on Monday morning.

You could spend days trying all of the activities in the studio from slime-making to sand art.

There are even Christmas-themed sessions where you can make a cuddly reindeer or decorate a festive plate.

My little one’s favourite craft was foam clay modeling. She loved covering a ceramic animal with brightly-coloured, sticky beads.

We refuelled with a quick chow mein lunch at Chopstix and to Mabel’s delight, we grabbed ice cream and candy floss from the neighbouring Seaside Shack for pudding.

Guests can use facilities like the soft play, fun pool, mini-golf and parks for free, while activities with specialist equipment like bikes and roller skates come with a small fee.

We hired a two-person bike and had great fun exploring the site and cycling down to the wide, sandy beach.

5

5

While she still had plenty of energy afterwards, I’m not a match-fit footie player, so she ran around in the soft play, while I sat and watched with a cuppa from Costa.

There’s a full schedule of evening entertainment with family-friendly pantomimes, discos and games – and harry Maguire joined his family for an evening of bingo.

But my little one was finally shattered from her action-packed day of activities, so we switched the electric fire in our lodge on and cosied up on the sofa in our PJs. 

We ordered meals including a Papa John’s pizza using the Haven app, which delivers anywhere on-site for no extra charge.

There were plenty of eateries to choose from including Burger King, a traditional fish and chip shop and a family-style pub.

On Sunday, we joined an aqua jetting class where you grab onto a handheld jet and whizz across the water.

It looks really tricky, but Mabel, who was the smallest child in the group, was happily zooming around the pool with everyone in minutes.

In each session across the weekend, I noticed that the staff took care to ensure quieter kids felt included.

Haven Holiday Costs

Advertisement

IF you were thinking about going to Haven this summer, here’s a helpful breakdown of the costs.

Accommodation

• Standard Caravan: £150-£300 per week (off-peak) / £400-£700 per week (peak season)
• Luxury Caravan/Lodge: £400-£600 per week (off-peak) / £800-£1,200 per week (peak season)

Food and Drink

• Self-Catering:
  • Groceries: £50-£100 per week (depending on family size and preferences)
• Eating Out:
  • On-site Restaurants: £10-£20 per meal per person
  • Local Restaurants/Pubs: £15-£25 per meal per person

Activities and Entertainment

• On-site Activities:
  • Swimming Pool: Free (included in holiday cost)
  • Kids’ Clubs: Free (included in holiday cost)
  • Evening Entertainment: Free (included in holiday cost)
  • Paid Activities (e.g., mini-golf, bike hire): £5-£20 per activity

Transportation

• Driving:
  • Fuel: £30-£60 (depending on distance)
• Public Transport:
  • Train/Bus: £20-£100 per person (depending on distance and time of booking)

Extras

• Travel Insurance: £10-£30 per week
• Souvenirs/Gifts: £20-£50

Estimated cost for a family of four for one week:

• Off-Peak: £400-£800 (accommodation) + £200-£300 (food) + £50-£100 (activities) + £50-£100 (transportation) + £50-£80 (extras) = £750-£1,380
• Peak Season: £800-£1,200 (accommodation) + £200-£300 (food) + £50-£100 (activities) + £50-£100 (transportation) + £50-£80 (extras) = £1,150-£1,780

Please note that these are approximate costs and can vary based on specific locations, personal preferences, and time of booking. Always check the latest prices and offers directly with Haven or through a travel agent.

Haven has clearly put huge consideration into designing activities that kids love and that’s why, for us, this trip was better than any fancy cruise or all-inclusive holiday abroad.

And thanks to our stylish caravan, we didn’t even need to miss out on that luxury vibe.

Good morning. Labour’s difficult start to life in office has rightly taken the headlines, as the government’s actions a) have real world consequences and b) will have a bigger impact on the next election in four to five years than anything the Conservative party does.

But it’s important not to lose sight of the fact that despite Labour’s difficulties, no poll has yet shown a significant shift in the balance of political forces. Some thoughts about how voters see both Labour and the Tories ahead of the latter’s first conference in opposition since 2009.

Slipping away

Here are the overall scores on the door from the latest Ipsos poll.

Now, some of these matter rather more than others. Some have tended to be more predictive since Ipsos first started polling the UK.

Here’s one that, throughout the time Ipsos has asked it, has been incredibly predictive: which party is seen as more “extreme”. This has been true regardless of whether the winning party was seen as moderate or not. People were not telling Ipsos (or RSL as it then was) that Margaret Thatcher was “moderate”. They did, however, consistently find her to be less extreme than Michael Foot or Neil Kinnock.

We can see a couple of things here. The first is how much harm that Liz Truss’s 49 day premiership and the “Let Rishi be Rishi” strategy (the ill-fated plan at last year’s party conference to pitch the former prime minister as a break with consensus) did to the Conservative party. The last election was not particularly hard to understand: the Conservatives moved away from the ground they fought and won the 2019 election on, Labour moved towards it. As a result, we now have a Labour government.

It should also worry Labour that it is slipping and cheer Conservatives that the Tory party shows signs of recovery on this metric. This stuff does really matter — look, for instance, at the Ipsos “out of date” tracker, usually a pretty good sign of whether people think that a government is getting tired.

As I said, my theory of elections is pretty basic: they are a contest between whether or not the government of the day has managed to make itself seem worth re-electing and if people feel the opposition isn’t a scary prospect. The story of the 2017 to 2020 period is that people often felt like a change, but they looked at the opposition and went, “hmm, not so sure about that change”.

So it matters a lot that in spite of Labour’s recent difficulties, the Conservatives still trail badly on “fit to govern”.

So, that’s the challenge facing the Conservatives as they meet for the next stage of their protracted leadership election: to find a leader who can turn around perceptions that the party is not fit to govern, is not clapped out and behind the times. At the same time, the candidate must not undo the party’s recent progress when it comes to not being seen as more “extreme” than Labour. Oh, and it would be a good idea if they picked someone capable of putting this usually predictive finding into reverse, too:

A tall order for all four candidates as the party gathers in Birmingham for its annual conference.

Now try this

I’m indebted to the Centre of European Reform’s Charles Grant for the suggestion that I give the music of composer Michael Tippett a go and have spent much of my time since the Labour party conference devouring whatever recordings of his I can find. I particularly enjoyed this recording of the Corelli Fantasia, in part because it is very good, but also because it follows three of my favourite pieces by some of Tippett’s contemporaries — Edward Elgar, Benjamin Britten and Ralph Vaughan Williams.

Unfortunately I cannot seem to find it on Spotify, in part because that website continues to be pretty dreadful at finding classical music and jazz. (Far and away the best value streaming service for me is Apple Classical.) However, this very good recording of A Child of Our Time is on Spotify. I will be listening to a great deal more Tippett as I board the train to the Conservative party conference in Birmingham.

For fans of “Lunch with the FT”, now in its 30th year, a special newsletter series sharing a few highlights from the archive launches this Sunday — delivered for free by email.

However you spend it, have a wonderful weekend!

Top stories today

MILLIONS of households are no longer eligible for this year’s winter fuel payments.

However, hundreds of thousands of households could secure the cash if they launch a claim for pension credit before the December deadline.

1

In the past, winter fuel payments worth up to £300 were available to everyone aged 66 and above.

However, after Labour’s election victory, Chancellor Rachel Reeves introduced cuts limiting winter fuel payment eligibility to those on pension credit or other means-tested benefits.

To be eligible for this year’s payment, you must have an active claim for the benefits mentioned above during the “qualifying week,” which runs from 16 to 22 September (this week).

Most households automatically receive the winter fuel payment, including those on pension credit.

However, 800,000 households are thought to be missing out on pension credit, which unlocks their eligibility for this year’s winter fuel payment.

As new claims for pension credit can be backdated by up to three months, you can still apply now and qualify for this year’s winter fuel payment.

The absolute deadline to claim the benefit and qualify is December 21.

Pension credit tops up your weekly income to £218.15 if you are single or to £332.95 if you have a partner.

This is known as “guarantee credit”.

If your income is lower than this, you’re very likely to be eligible for the benefit.

What if my income is higher?

If your income is slightly higher than the following rates, you might still be eligible for pension credit:

• Single: £218 a week
• Couple: £333 a week

For example, single applicants might still be eligible if their weekly income is under £235.

And those in couples may still get it if they earn under £350 a week.

Those with disabilities, who care for someone, or who get help with their housing costs could still qualify.

For example, if you claim attendance allowance, the threshold at which you can qualify for pension credit rises by £82 a week.

The benefit is open to people over state pension age who need help with personal care due to a physical or mental disability.

The income you receive through attendance allowance is not counted towards your eligibility for pension credit.

If you claim carer’s allowance, the threshold at which you can qualify for pension credit also rises by £46 a week.

Those who receive help with their housing costs could also still be eligible for pension credit even if they breach the earnings thresholds.

For example, you could get an extra amount to cover your housing costs, such as:

• Ground rent if your property is a leasehold
• Some service charges
• Charges for tents and site rents

The exact amount you could get depends on your housing costs.

However, if you’re found to be eligible for pension credit, it could unlock your ability to qualify for the following extra support:

• Council tax reduction
• Housing benefit if you rent the property you live in
• Support for mortgage interest if you own the property you live in

What about savings?

If you have £10,000 or less in savings and investments, this will not affect your eligibility for pension credit.

If you have more than £10,000, every £500 over £10,000 counts as £1 income a week.

For example, if you have £11,000 in savings, this counts as £2 income a week.

If you’ve ever seen a Mercedes driving on a roundabout with what looks like an open trunk, there’s a logical explanation.

Trun Partially Open

According to AD many modern Mercedes owners have experienced the gestures of fellow drivers signaling that their trunk is ajar. However, there’s rarely a cause for concern.

Mercedes has long been at the forefront of automotive technology and safety innovations. Many safety features commonly attributed to other brands, like Volvo, were actually pioneered by Mercedes.

Innovations such as crumple zones, anti-lock braking systems (ABS), airbags, and seatbelt tensioners were all developed by the brand with the star emblem.

Recently, Mercedes has introduced a unique safety feature that causes the trunk lid to partially open while navigating a roundabout. However, it’s important to clarify that this does not involve the entire trunk lid but rather a smaller compartment that houses the Mercedes emblem, which is used to open the trunk.