AI personal shoppers hunt down bargain buys
Internet giants are diving deeper into e-commerce with digital aides that know shoppers' likes, let them virtually try clothes on, hunt for deals and even place orders.
The rise of virtual personal shoppers springs from generative artificial intelligence (AI) being put to work in "agents" specializing in specific tasks and given autonomy to complete them independently.
"This is basically the next evolution of shopping experiences," said CFRA Research analyst Angelo Zino.
Google last week unveiled shopping features built into a new "AI Mode".
It can take a person's own photo and meld it with that of a skirt, shirt or other piece of clothing spotted online, showing how it will look on them.
The AI adjusts the clothing size to fit, accounting for how fabrics drape, according to Google head of advertising and commerce Vidhya Srinivasan.
Shoppers can then set the price they would pay and leave the AI to relentlessly browse the internet for a deal -- alerting the shopper when it finds one, and asking if it should buy using Google's payment platform.
"They're taking on Amazon a little bit," Techsponential analyst Avi Greengart said of Google.
The tool is also a way to make money from AI by increasing online traffic and opportunities to show ads, Greengart added.
The Silicon Valley tech titan did not respond to a query regarding whether it is sharing in revenue from shopping transactions. Bartering bots?
OpenAI added a shopping feature to ChatGPT earlier this year, enabling the chatbot to respond to requests with product suggestions, consumer reviews and links to merchant websites.
Perplexity AI late last year began letting subscribers pay for online purchases without leaving its app.
Amazon in April added a "Buy for Me" mode to its Rufus digital assistant, allowing users to command it to make purchases at retailer websites off Amazon's platform.
Walmart head of technology Hari Vasudev recently spoke about adding an AI agent to the retail behemoth's online shopping portal, while also working with partners to make sure their digital agents keep Walmart products in mind.
Global payment networks Visa and Mastercard in April each said their technical systems were modernized to allow payment transactions by digital agents.
"As AI agents start to take over the bulk of product discovery and the decision-making process, retailers must consider how to optimize for this new layer of AI shoppers," said Elise Watson of Clarkston Consulting.
Retailers are likely to be left groping in the dark when it comes to what makes a product attractive to AI agents, according to Watson. Knowing the customer
Analyst Zino does not expect AI shoppers to cause an e-commerce industry upheaval, but he does see the technology benenfitting Google and Meta.
Not only do the Internet rivals have massive amounts of data about their users, but they are also among frontrunners in the AI race.
"They probably have more information on the consumer than anyone else out there," Zino said of Google and Meta.
Tech company access to data about users hits the hot-button issue of online privacy and who should control personal information.
Google plans to refine consumer profiles based on what people search for and promises that shoppers will need to authorize access to additional information such as email or app use.
Trusting a chatbot with one's buying decisions may spook some people, and while the technology might be in place the legal and ethical framework for it is not.
"The agent economy is here," said PSE Consulting managing director Chris Jones.
"The next phase of e-commerce will depend on whether we can trust machines to buy on our behalf."(AFP)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
7 hours ago
- The Sun
HAIR THIS I'm ‘obsessed' with an £8 Amazon buy for hair growth – it reversed my post-partum hair loss in weeks
SHOPPERS are raving about an £8 Amazon buy for hair growth which could help reverse post-partum hair loss. While postpartum hair loss is a common side effect of pregnancy, it makes many women feel insecure. Four to five months after giving birth, the hair will shed at an alarming rate, and it can be worrying. Our hair grows in cycles: a growing phase, a resting phase, and a shedding phase that continues to repeat. But during pregnancy, most of the hair stays in the growth phase due to those big changes in your body's hormones. Once your baby arrives and your hormones begin to change again, the level of estrogen falls, causing your thick head of pregnancy hair to begin the shedding phase. Because so much of your hair sheds all at once, the volume of hair loss seems far more substantial. But customers are hailing a "miracle" oil, which can fit into any haircare routine - applied daily or as a luxurious mask before wash day. Some shoppers have claimed it could reverse their postpartum hair loss in weeks. Mielle's original Rosemary Mint Scalp & Hair Strengthening Oil can be added to your Amazon basket for just £7.33. It promotes "amazing moisture and shine" and supports "longer, healthier hair". The product is infused with the vitamin biotin, which is also beneficial for nails and skin. There are no parabens, sulfates, paraffins, mineral oil, or DEA, and it's not tested on animals. "Mielle aims to empower women of all hair types and styles with powerful products and gentle, organic ingredients that amplify your natural beauty and are the 'root to results' that leave you looking and feeling your best," said the company. Shoppers have been raving about the hair oil, and even claimed it helped them with post-partum hair loss. "This oil has been a true saviour for me after experiencing postpartum hair loss, which left me with noticeable bald spots around my hairline," penned one. "Having used this consistently for a year, I am thrilled with the results." Another added: "This stuff is a miracle worker! Even the hairdressers at my salon noticed my hair growth and asked what have I been using! Bonus point- it's helped my nails grow as well." A third agreed: "This product has been remarkable. My hair fall have reduced significantly after the last use. Definitely recommended." This comes as a radio presenter has revealed that she suffered severe hair loss after having her second child, but a 59p buy has got it looking thick and healthy again. Meanwhile, another woman shared how she grew her hair thicker using this simple £2 remedy from Asda. She told how she took her hair from the size of a pinky in a ponytail to long and luscious using this one clever hack. Elsewhere, this is a £6 shampoo shoppers are going wild for, which makes your hair grow quickly, but it won't be in the beauty aisle. Hair loss tips We can lose between 50 and 100 hairs a day, according to the NHS. It is not usually something to worry about, but occasional it can be a sign of a medical concern. These include illness, stress, cancer treatment, weight loss and iron deficiency. The NHS advises to book an appointment with your GP to see if you can get to the cause of it. Experts at American Academy of Dermatology Association also recommend to eat healthy, limit curling irons and only use them for special occasions. They also recommend using a gentle shampoo, and make use of leave-in conditioners.
Geeky Gadgets
15 hours ago
- Geeky Gadgets
Deepseek R1-0528: The Open Source AI Model That Could Topple Big Tech Giants
What if one model could dismantle the dominance of AI giants like OpenAI and Google? That's exactly what some are saying about Deepseek R1-0528, the open source disruptor that's sending shockwaves through the artificial intelligence industry. With performance that rivals proprietary titans like GPT-4 and Gemini 2.5 Pro—at a fraction of the cost—Deepseek isn't just another player in the game; it's rewriting the rules entirely. But this isn't just about cheaper AI. It's about a deeper shift in power, accessibility, and the very future of how we innovate. Could this be the moment where open source finally topples the closed gates of Big Tech? Wes Roth explores how Deepseek R1-0528 is reshaping the AI landscape and what it means for you. From its new cost efficiency to the ethical dilemmas it raises, this model is more than just a technological achievement—it's a statement. You'll discover the methods behind its performance, the growing divide between open source and proprietary AI, and the geopolitical tensions fueling this revolution. Whether you're a tech enthusiast, a business leader, or just curious about the future of AI, this story has implications that reach far beyond the tech world. After all, when the foundations of an industry shake, everyone feels the tremors. Deepseek's Disruptive Impact Performance That Matches Industry Leaders Deepseek R1-0528 has demonstrated its ability to compete with some of the most advanced proprietary AI models available today. Benchmark tests reveal that it outperforms Google's Gemini 2.5 Pro in specific tasks while maintaining parity with OpenAI's GPT-4 (03) in others. However, what truly sets Deepseek apart is its cost efficiency. By offering significantly lower API costs, it makes high-performance AI accessible to a broader audience, including small businesses, independent researchers, and startups. This affordability has the potential to provide widespread access to AI adoption, allowing organizations with limited budgets to use innovative technology. For you, this means access to powerful AI tools without the financial barriers often associated with proprietary systems. Open source vs. Proprietary AI: A Growing Divide The rise of Deepseek R1-0528 highlights the increasing divide between open source and proprietary AI models. Open source solutions like Deepseek challenge the business models of closed-source companies by delivering similar capabilities at a fraction of the cost. This shift could lead to a more equitable distribution of AI technology, allowing smaller players to compete with industry giants. However, it also raises concerns about the sustainability of proprietary research and development. Proprietary models often rely on substantial funding to push the boundaries of innovation, and the growing popularity of open source alternatives could disrupt this ecosystem. For you, the choice between open source and proprietary AI may come down to balancing cost, performance, and long-term support. Deepseek R1-0528 Just Broke the Entire AI Industry Watch this video on YouTube. Take a look at other insightful guides from our broad collection that might capture your interest in Deepseek. How Deepseek Achieves Its Performance The methods behind Deepseek R1-0528's impressive performance have sparked significant interest and speculation. Experts suggest that the model may have employed knowledge distillation, a technique where synthetic outputs from proprietary models like Gemini are used to train new models. This approach enables open source models to replicate the performance of their proprietary counterparts without requiring direct access to their datasets. Additionally, bioinformatics tools have been used to analyze AI outputs, providing insights into model lineage and training strategies. These innovative methods demonstrate how open source models can achieve high performance while operating within resource constraints, offering a blueprint for future development in the field. Global AI Competition: The U.S. and China Face Off The release of Deepseek R1-0528 underscores the intensifying competition between the United States and China in AI development. Historically, the U.S. has been a leader in software innovation, but China's growing focus on open source AI and its advanced hardware manufacturing capabilities could shift the balance of power. For instance, China's expertise in semiconductor production may provide it with an edge in deploying AI systems at scale. Meanwhile, U.S. policymakers are exploring strategies such as R&D tax incentives to maintain their competitive advantage. For you, this rivalry could influence the availability, affordability, and direction of AI technologies in the years to come, shaping the tools and platforms you rely on. Ethical and Strategic Challenges The rise of open source AI models like Deepseek R1-0528 brings both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, open source AI aligns with the goal of providing widespread access to access to advanced technologies, making them available to a wider audience. On the other hand, it introduces risks related to AI safety and misuse. For example, the accessibility of powerful AI tools could lead to unintended consequences, such as their use in malicious applications. Governments and private organizations in both the U.S. and China are under scrutiny for their roles in AI development. Critics question whether concerns about safety and regulation are genuine or driven by geopolitical motives, adding complexity to the ethical debate. For you, understanding these challenges is essential to navigating the evolving AI landscape responsibly. The Future of AI Innovation As global competition in AI intensifies, the stakes for innovation and collaboration continue to rise. Open source models like Deepseek R1-0528 have the potential to redefine the industry by making advanced AI capabilities more accessible and affordable. For researchers, developers, and businesses, this represents an opportunity to innovate without being constrained by proprietary systems. However, the broader implications for national security, economic policy, and ethical standards remain uncertain. The balance between fostering innovation and addressing potential risks will play a critical role in shaping the future of AI. For you, staying informed about these developments will be key to using the opportunities and addressing the challenges that lie ahead. Media Credit: Wes Roth Filed Under: AI, Top News Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
Glasgow Times
16 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
East Dunbartonshire council questioned over use of AI in school policy
Critics have hit out at the design of surveys that formed part of the process, as well as the council's use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools to analyse responses, with the local authority now facing formal complaints about the matter. As part of work to develop a new policy around smartphones in schools, officials at East Dunbartonshire Council opened online surveys for teachers, parents, secondary school students and upper-primary school pupils. READ MORE: River City did not pass value for money test, BBC Scotland boss tells MSPs Each survey, which did not collect names but did record information on the schools that young people attend, ran for around two weeks, with the council receiving a total of more than 11,000 responses across the four different groups. In order to process the survey data 'efficiently and consistently', council officers made use of several AI tools to process the contents of open text boxes in which respondents were invited to add 'any additional information' that they wished to be considered as part of the review. This material, including that produced by young children, was input to ChatGPT, Gemini AI and Microsoft Copilot, which were used to 'assist in reviewing and summarising the anonymous comments.' Officials say that this generated a 'breakdown of key messages' that were then provided to the project working group, but when asked to share the summary of survey responses claimed that this 'is not available as yet.' Asked to explain how the output of AI platforms was checked for accuracy, the council stated that cross-validation, human oversight, triangulation and bias-monitoring processes were all applied, with reviews by officials ensuring 'fidelity' to the more than 11,000 responses that were received. Officials stated that these 'safeguards' would ensure that 'the final summaries accurately reflect the breadth and nuance of stakeholder views gathered during the consultation.' However, those taking part in the survey were not informed that their information would be processed using AI platforms. The Information Commissioner's Office, which regulates areas such as data protection across the whole of the UK, told The Herald that they would expect organisations including local authorities to be "transparent' about how data is being processed, including advising of the purpose of AI tools that are to be used and explaining what the council intends to do with the outputs that are generated. The council has told The Herald that the surveys closed on 13 or 14 May, that work on a new policy began on 19 May, and that a full draft policy had been produced and submitted to the legal department by 27 May – the same day on which the council had been approached about the issue. However, material seen by The Herald shows officials advising parents that the policy had been written and submitted to the legal department by 20 May, just one day after the council claims to have begun drafting the document. An explanation has been requested from the council. READ MORE: 10 Glasgow areas set to have fireworks ban A comparison of the surveys issued to each group also confirms that a key question about was not included in the parents version of the survey, although it was present in the versions that were issued to teachers and pupils. Parents were asked the extent to which they support either a ban on phone use during lessons, or a ban on use during lessons unless their use is approved by a teacher. However, the other versions of the survey also asked explicitly whether respondents support a ban on the use of phones during the whole school day. The omission has provoked an angry response from some parents. As a result of these and other concerns, formal complaints have now been submitted to East Dunbartonshire Council alleging that the 'flawed survey information and structure' is not fit for purpose, and that the views of parents have not been fully explored or fairly represented. Commenting on behalf of the local Smartphone Free Childhood campaign group, one parent raised significant concerns about the council's approach: 'The fact that parents were the only group not asked about a full ban shocked us. But we were assured that the free text answers we gave would be properly looked at and considered. 'As a result, many parents left long, detailed and personal stories in response to this survey question. 'They shared heart-breaking stories of kids losing sleep at night after seeing things they shouldn't have. Other stories included girls and teachers being filmed without their consent - and kids being afraid to report the extent of what they're seeing in school because of peer pressure. 'There were long, careful responses outlining their concerns - where has this all gone? 'We have been told that an AI tool was used to summarise all this into five 'top-line' policy considerations. We're not sure if the rest was looked at? 'Not only is it not good enough - it's a betrayal of parents who have trusted the council to listen to their concerns. 'It's also not clear how they've shared and processed these highly personal responses from parents, children and teachers - some containing identifiable details, to an unknown 'AI platform' without our consent. We don't know who can access the data.' The Herald contacted East Dunbartonshire Council asking whether the information in the open text boxes was checked for personal or identifying details before being submitted to AI systems. Officials were also asked to provide a copy of the council's current policy on AI use. The response received from the council did not engage with these queries. We also asked why the council had given two different dates in response to questions about when its new draft policy was completed, and whether the council has provided false information as a consequence. READ MORE: 'Fun police': Decision made on the selling of ice cream in Glasgow parks A spokesperson insisted that "the draft policy was formally submitted to Legal on 27 May for consideration" and asked to be provided with evidence suggesting otherwise so that they could investigate. Finally, the council was asked to explain why the surveys for pupils and teachers included an explicit question about full bans on smartphones during the school day. Their spokesperson said: "The pupil survey included a specific question on full day bans to gather targeted data from young people. The working group which consisted of Head Teachers, Depute Head Teachers, Quality Improvement Officers and an EIS representative, felt that the young people may be less likely to leave an additional comment in the open text box and so wanted to explicitly ask this question. Parents were intentionally given an open text box to avoid steering responses and to allow respondents to freely express their views. The open text box was used by parents to express their view on a full day ban which many did."
