Canada’s most prestigious science prize was awarded this week to Yoshua Bengio, a pioneer in artificial intelligence who’s got some honest doubts about the future of his field.
Bengio, the scientific director of the Montreal Institute for Learning Algorithms and Université de Montréal professor, is this year’s recipient of the Herzberg Canada Gold Medal for Science and Engineering, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) announced Wednesday. The award is presented annually to Canadians whose work has shown “persistent excellence and influence” in the fields of natural sciences or engineering.
Bengio’s breakthrough work in artificial neural networks and deep learning earned him the nickname of “godfather of AI,” which he shares with Yann LeCun and fellow Canadian Geoffrey Hinton.
With neural networks, “the idea was that we might be able to build intelligent machines by taking inspiration from neuroscience, from the brain,” Bengio told Quirks & Quarks. Deep learning underlies much of the recent advancement in AI technology, from image and speech recognition to generative AI and natural language processing behind tools like ChatGPT.
Bengio spoke withQuirks & Quarks host Bob McDonald about the recent developments in the field of AI and his hopes and concerns about the future.
Here is part of their conversation.
What are some of the achievements that you are particularly proud of?
Well, I’ll start with something that’s very relevant today. In 2000, I published a paper at the main neural net conference called NeurIPS, and it was about neural networks for modelling language, sequences of words. And a recipe very similar to this is actually what is used right now to train those huge language models and chatbots.
Another discovery of mine in 2014 introduced something inspired by the brain, which is attention mechanisms — something that allows us to focus on the few elements, like a few words in the calculations that our brain does. So we put something like this into these artificial neural nets and it turned out to be extremely useful, and it gave rise to much better machine translation first and then much better language models. And these kinds of attention mechanisms are used in the state of the art today more and more.
When did you start to be concerned that the field of artificial intelligence is moving too fast?
I’ve been concerned about social impact for many years already. A decade ago, when large companies started using machine learning, neural nets, deep learning for advertising, I was a bit worried that it would end up being used to manipulate people. But it’s really this year with ChatGPT that my concerns have increased by a whole notch.
Essentially, the question that I’ve been worried about is: we are on a trajectory to build machines that may eventually surpass us in many areas, and potentially on everything. And what’s going to happen when along that trajectory, is the power of the tool going to become something dangerous in the wrong hands? Or could we even lose control of these systems if they are smarter than us? These are all important questions to which, unfortunately, we don’t have the answers.
And the answers are both scientific — like how do we make sure any AI system does what we want, and we don’t have the answer to that — and they are political, or about governance. What sort of regulation and laws and international treaties should we put in place to make sure that such a powerful and potentially extremely useful tool is not harming people and society?
Montreal-based AI godfather warns about dangers of artificial intelligence
Featured VideoYoshua Bengio, a professor at Université de Montréal who was recently appointed to the UN Scientific Advisory Board, says people will build machines that are smarter than them, but which could be “misused in dangerous ways”.
Now, you’re one of the people who brought us this technology. Why didn’t you anticipate the dangers that it might pose?
I should have. Well, it sounded like science fiction before I saw the incredible abilities of these modern systems in 2022-2023. I thought that, well, it would be decades, if not centuries, before we got to human-level performance.
But I think there are other reasons that are psychological. You know, researchers are human beings. We may reason in ways that are aligned with what motivates us, what makes us feel good about our work. It’s hard to suddenly consider your work as something that could be dangerous for society, and you may look the other way. So I think there are many factors here that explain also even why now, it’s difficult for many in the community to take these risks seriously.
So what do you think the recipe for regulating the technology is?
The first thing is not to be discouraged, and to think about the little things that we can do as quickly as possible that can move the needle. So we first need to get governments to understand that this is very powerful technology, like any other scientific output, that can change, transform society. It needs to be done carefully. And Canada has been moving fairly well and preparing a law that would also already do a good job.
But what we need to do more, we need to work on the international level to make sure that as many countries as possible work together to harmonize their legislation, to make sure, for example, that all of these potentially dangerous systems are registered. We make sure that the companies or the organizations working on them are taking the right precautions.
We want to make sure that there is also democratic oversight. So what I mean by this is, well, yes, regulators need to know what is going on, but also media and academics and civil society. Because we are building tools that will be more and more powerful, and power concentration is sort of the opposite of democracy. We need to make sure that there are checks and balances, so that this power is used for good.
What is your optimistic vision for the future of artificial intelligence?
For many years now, and especially since the beginning of the pandemic, I’ve been interested in how machine learning, deep learning could be used to help scientific discovery in many fields. And in particular, I think that it’s very likely that we’ll see a revolution in some of these fields. I think of biology especially, because we are now generating huge quantities of data, for example, about what is going on in your cells. You know, your cells are incredibly complex machines. But we now have ways of peeking and poking and measuring huge quantities of what is going on. And that provides information that the human brain cannot digest directly. But AI can really help us form theories and models that could help us understand that on a scientific level, but also cure. Once we understand how something works, we can design the drugs.
The federal government is ordering the dissolution of TikTok’s Canadian business after a national security review of the Chinese company behind the social media platform, but stopped short of ordering people to stay off the app.
Industry Minister François-Philippe Champagne announced the government’s “wind up” demand Wednesday, saying it is meant to address “risks” related to ByteDance Ltd.’s establishment of TikTok Technology Canada Inc.
“The decision was based on the information and evidence collected over the course of the review and on the advice of Canada’s security and intelligence community and other government partners,” he said in a statement.
The announcement added that the government is not blocking Canadians’ access to the TikTok application or their ability to create content.
However, it urged people to “adopt good cybersecurity practices and assess the possible risks of using social media platforms and applications, including how their information is likely to be protected, managed, used and shared by foreign actors, as well as to be aware of which country’s laws apply.”
Champagne’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment seeking details about what evidence led to the government’s dissolution demand, how long ByteDance has to comply and why the app is not being banned.
A TikTok spokesperson said in a statement that the shutdown of its Canadian offices will mean the loss of hundreds of well-paying local jobs.
“We will challenge this order in court,” the spokesperson said.
“The TikTok platform will remain available for creators to find an audience, explore new interests and for businesses to thrive.”
The federal Liberals ordered a national security review of TikTok in September 2023, but it was not public knowledge until The Canadian Press reported in March that it was investigating the company.
At the time, it said the review was based on the expansion of a business, which it said constituted the establishment of a new Canadian entity. It declined to provide any further details about what expansion it was reviewing.
A government database showed a notification of new business from TikTok in June 2023. It said Network Sense Ventures Ltd. in Toronto and Vancouver would engage in “marketing, advertising, and content/creator development activities in relation to the use of the TikTok app in Canada.”
Even before the review, ByteDance and TikTok were lightning rod for privacy and safety concerns because Chinese national security laws compel organizations in the country to assist with intelligence gathering.
Such concerns led the U.S. House of Representatives to pass a bill in March designed to ban TikTok unless its China-based owner sells its stake in the business.
Champagne’s office has maintained Canada’s review was not related to the U.S. bill, which has yet to pass.
Canada’s review was carried out through the Investment Canada Act, which allows the government to investigate any foreign investment with potential to might harm national security.
While cabinet can make investors sell parts of the business or shares, Champagne has said the act doesn’t allow him to disclose details of the review.
Wednesday’s dissolution order was made in accordance with the act.
The federal government banned TikTok from its mobile devices in February 2023 following the launch of an investigation into the company by federal and provincial privacy commissioners.
— With files from Anja Karadeglija in Ottawa
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 6, 2024.
LONDON (AP) — Most people have accumulated a pile of data — selfies, emails, videos and more — on their social media and digital accounts over their lifetimes. What happens to it when we die?
It’s wise to draft a will spelling out who inherits your physical assets after you’re gone, but don’t forget to take care of your digital estate too. Friends and family might treasure files and posts you’ve left behind, but they could get lost in digital purgatory after you pass away unless you take some simple steps.
Here’s how you can prepare your digital life for your survivors:
Apple
The iPhone maker lets you nominate a “ legacy contact ” who can access your Apple account’s data after you die. The company says it’s a secure way to give trusted people access to photos, files and messages. To set it up you’ll need an Apple device with a fairly recent operating system — iPhones and iPads need iOS or iPadOS 15.2 and MacBooks needs macOS Monterey 12.1.
For iPhones, go to settings, tap Sign-in & Security and then Legacy Contact. You can name one or more people, and they don’t need an Apple ID or device.
You’ll have to share an access key with your contact. It can be a digital version sent electronically, or you can print a copy or save it as a screenshot or PDF.
Take note that there are some types of files you won’t be able to pass on — including digital rights-protected music, movies and passwords stored in Apple’s password manager. Legacy contacts can only access a deceased user’s account for three years before Apple deletes the account.
Google
Google takes a different approach with its Inactive Account Manager, which allows you to share your data with someone if it notices that you’ve stopped using your account.
When setting it up, you need to decide how long Google should wait — from three to 18 months — before considering your account inactive. Once that time is up, Google can notify up to 10 people.
You can write a message informing them you’ve stopped using the account, and, optionally, include a link to download your data. You can choose what types of data they can access — including emails, photos, calendar entries and YouTube videos.
There’s also an option to automatically delete your account after three months of inactivity, so your contacts will have to download any data before that deadline.
Facebook and Instagram
Some social media platforms can preserve accounts for people who have died so that friends and family can honor their memories.
When users of Facebook or Instagram die, parent company Meta says it can memorialize the account if it gets a “valid request” from a friend or family member. Requests can be submitted through an online form.
The social media company strongly recommends Facebook users add a legacy contact to look after their memorial accounts. Legacy contacts can do things like respond to new friend requests and update pinned posts, but they can’t read private messages or remove or alter previous posts. You can only choose one person, who also has to have a Facebook account.
You can also ask Facebook or Instagram to delete a deceased user’s account if you’re a close family member or an executor. You’ll need to send in documents like a death certificate.
TikTok
The video-sharing platform says that if a user has died, people can submit a request to memorialize the account through the settings menu. Go to the Report a Problem section, then Account and profile, then Manage account, where you can report a deceased user.
Once an account has been memorialized, it will be labeled “Remembering.” No one will be able to log into the account, which prevents anyone from editing the profile or using the account to post new content or send messages.
X
It’s not possible to nominate a legacy contact on Elon Musk’s social media site. But family members or an authorized person can submit a request to deactivate a deceased user’s account.
Passwords
Besides the major online services, you’ll probably have dozens if not hundreds of other digital accounts that your survivors might need to access. You could just write all your login credentials down in a notebook and put it somewhere safe. But making a physical copy presents its own vulnerabilities. What if you lose track of it? What if someone finds it?
Instead, consider a password manager that has an emergency access feature. Password managers are digital vaults that you can use to store all your credentials. Some, like Keeper,Bitwarden and NordPass, allow users to nominate one or more trusted contacts who can access their keys in case of an emergency such as a death.
But there are a few catches: Those contacts also need to use the same password manager and you might have to pay for the service.
___
Is there a tech challenge you need help figuring out? Write to us at onetechtip@ap.org with your questions.
LONDON (AP) — Britain’s competition watchdog said Thursday it’s opening a formal investigation into Google’s partnership with artificial intelligence startup Anthropic.
The Competition and Markets Authority said it has “sufficient information” to launch an initial probe after it sought input earlier this year on whether the deal would stifle competition.
The CMA has until Dec. 19 to decide whether to approve the deal or escalate its investigation.
“Google is committed to building the most open and innovative AI ecosystem in the world,” the company said. “Anthropic is free to use multiple cloud providers and does, and we don’t demand exclusive tech rights.”
San Francisco-based Anthropic was founded in 2021 by siblings Dario and Daniela Amodei, who previously worked at ChatGPT maker OpenAI. The company has focused on increasing the safety and reliability of AI models. Google reportedly agreed last year to make a multibillion-dollar investment in Anthropic, which has a popular chatbot named Claude.
Anthropic said it’s cooperating with the regulator and will provide “the complete picture about Google’s investment and our commercial collaboration.”
“We are an independent company and none of our strategic partnerships or investor relationships diminish the independence of our corporate governance or our freedom to partner with others,” it said in a statement.
The U.K. regulator has been scrutinizing a raft of AI deals as investment money floods into the industry to capitalize on the artificial intelligence boom. Last month it cleared Anthropic’s $4 billion deal with Amazon and it has also signed off on Microsoft’s deals with two other AI startups, Inflection and Mistral.
