These people are certifiable and have too much money to misallocate on nonsense. This is like Gavin Belson's holographic avatar (which of course did not work).
Seeing Zuck's "swag" makeover, down to the gold chain and Justin Timberlake curly coiff, I'd say the analogy should be Russ Hanneman's 100-foot Coachella hologram.
Actually it shouldn't be too hard, just a cardboard cutout with a pullstring which, when pulled, intones "we're really sorry about this and it will never happen again, I promise".
For artificial intelligence to replace oneself, it would need a digital copy of one's way of thinking. I believe this is impossible to implement with current AI.
The FT piece says "They added that the character was being trained on the billionaire’s mannerisms, tone and publicly available statements, as well as his own recent thinking on company strategies, so that employees might feel more connected to the founder through interactions with it."
Surely the more likely outcome is that employees feel less connected to "the founder" because they know that there's a high chance they are simply talking to an AI clone?
I can understand the appeal; being able to be "present" without the time cost can mean (possibly significantly more) presence at the same cost. This could be very attractive especially to those managing personal relations, like sales representatives.
But I'm surprised that the risks seem to be so underestimated.
Once this clone exists, what happens if it gets out into the wild? Imagine everyone having full access do what is effectively a digital model of your personality. Imagine your competition putting your own model to use against you.
And the better the approximation of this model, the worse the damage to yourself.
> Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg could soon have an AI clone of himself to interact with and provide feedback to employees, according to a report from the Financial Times.
There was an old Soviet cartoon about a child who found a box containing two magical servants and immediately asked them for ice cream and sweets. Well, since the servants "do everything for you", the first servant fetched the sweets for him, and the second one ate them for him. I've often thought about this cartoon since the AI thing started.
48 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 66.0 ms ] threadThe FT piece says "They added that the character was being trained on the billionaire’s mannerisms, tone and publicly available statements, as well as his own recent thinking on company strategies, so that employees might feel more connected to the founder through interactions with it."
Surely the more likely outcome is that employees feel less connected to "the founder" because they know that there's a high chance they are simply talking to an AI clone?
But I'm surprised that the risks seem to be so underestimated.
Once this clone exists, what happens if it gets out into the wild? Imagine everyone having full access do what is effectively a digital model of your personality. Imagine your competition putting your own model to use against you.
And the better the approximation of this model, the worse the damage to yourself.
https://www.ft.com/content/02107c23-6c7a-4c19-b8e2-b45f4bb9c...
https://archive.is/mtVXJ