Latest news with #LexFridman
Forbes
6 hours ago
- Business
- Forbes
Google CEO Sundar Pichai Is Optimistic About AI's Future
Here are five things in tech that happened this week and how they affect your business. Did you miss them? In a far reaching interview with podcaster Lex Fridman, Google CEO says that, while acknowledging the risks associated with artificial intelligence, he has optimism that humanity can collaboratively address potential challenges and believes hat as awareness of AI's risks grows, collective efforts will emerge to mitigate them. He advocated for balancing rapid innovation with ethical considerations to ensure that technological progress benefits society as a whole. He also shared insights into emerging technologies like Google Beam and XR glasses which he says will enhance how people connect and interact (Source: YouTube) Why this is important for your business: Google has a massive reach into both our personal and professional lives. Besides taking a deep dive into AI, Fridman – one of my favorite podcasters – discussed the status and future of many of the business products that Google provides – from ads and search to Gmail, Sheets, Maps, Docs and Meet as well as future innovations in robotics and research. If your business uses and relies on Google applications – and most do – this is an important conversation to better understand where the company is heading so you can be prepared to leverage their new offerings. GlassJar – a new accounting software company – has been launched by former accounting software founders to address long-standing frustrations with QuickBooks and similar legacy tools. The company aims to provide a simpler, more transparent solutions for small businesses and accountants. Key features: Streamlined user experience to reduce bookkeeping time and eliminate tedious workarounds. Fast performance without crashes or lag when handling large data sets. Flexible pricing so users only pay for what they need. GlassJar is currently in private development, with plans for a public beta later this year. The company is inviting small businesses, bookkeepers, and accountants to sign up for early access. (Source: Business Wire) Why this is important for your business: Taking on Intuit in the small business accounting space is really a David vs. Goliath challenge. How good does an accounting application need to be in order to get users to change from their existing software? Competition is good and I'm interested to check out what GlassJar is offering. But they've got major challenge in front of them – and an industry of conversative, non-risk taking accountants who will be a tough audience to convince. Anthropic has launched Claude Explains – a blog primarily written by its AI model, Claude, with human oversight. The blog focuses on technical topics, showcasing Claude's ability to generate educational content. Human editors will refine and enhance Claude's drafts before publication. The blog aims to demonstrate AI-human collaboration, rather than replacing human expertise. Topics range from creative writing to data analysis and business strategy. Anthropic sees this as an example of how AI can augment human work, not replace it. 'This isn't just vanilla Claude output – the editorial process requires human expertise,' an Anthropic spokesperson said. (Source: TechCrunch) Why this is important for your business: We use ChatGPT to write blogs for our site but of course we don't just publish right from the chatbot. A human reviews and edits the output first. I haven't tested Claude Explains so maybe it's more accurate. I'm finding more of my clients starting to choose their AI weapons. ChatGPT remains the most popular but there are a bunch who are devoted to Claude, Grok, CoPilot, Gemini and others. I'm sure the other chatbots will soon match Claude Explains offerings in an effort not to fall behind with their followings. Microsoft Teams is introducing a countdown timer feature to help users manage meeting time more effectively. This long-requested tool aims to improve meeting structure, presenter performance, and overall productivity. Key benefits include Structured Meetings, eliminating the need for third-party timers, allowing organizers to set a visible countdown within Teams. Better Presenter Performance to help speakers stay on track without relying on external time cues. Control & Flexibility allows organizers can pause, stop, or extend the timer as needed. Enhanced Productivity Culture encourages teams to be more mindful of time, reducing unnecessary meeting overruns. (Source: UC Today) Why this is important for your business: As much as we hate meetings, I'm finding that some of my corporate clients are getting good at keeping them to 30 minutes and no more. For the others that need a little more help, the tools that Teams is now offering seems very useful. A new study finds that AI chatbots are being adopted at an unprecedented rate, but their impact on workplace productivity remains modest. According to the study, AI chatbots save users only about 3 percent of work hours on average. Productivity gains rarely translate into higher wages, with only a 3-7 percent improvement in pay. Despite rapid adoption, AI chatbots have had no significant impact on earnings or recorded work hours. The report however, noted that past studies showed greater productivity gains – exceeding 15 percent. The study suggests that while AI chatbots help streamline tasks, their broader economic impact is still unclear. (Source: Computerworld) Why this is important for your business: There is no question that AI chatbots can someday significantly increase productivity. Used correctly they can generate blogs (see above), create and review contracts, write policies and perform searches much faster than the typical Google search because they summarize the results quicker. So what's the holdup? Hallucinations. No one I know trusts their output, so human oversight, verification and correction is always required. So whatever time is saved is offset by the additional time needed to catch and fix errors. You know this will improve, right? Every week I choose five business technology news stories and include in this column, along with my thoughts on how they impact small businesses.
Mint
2 days ago
- Business
- Mint
How Sundar Pichai responded to 'Google's lost... it's over. You're the wrong guy to lead Google' remark
In a candid exchange during a recent podcast with YouTuber and researcher Lex Fridman, Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai addressed growing public criticism about Google's perceived loss of momentum in the AI race, saying he remains confident in the company's long-term vision and leadership. Responding to a pointed comment —'Google's lost... it's over. You're the wrong guy to lead Google' — Pichai reflected on the strategic decisions he has made as CEO, emphasising the company's commitment to becoming 'AI-first' and responsibly building artificial general intelligence (AGI). 'Obviously, the main bet as a CEO I made was to make sure the company was approaching everything in an AI-first way,' Pichai said. 'We've made sure we put out products that are useful to people. I had a good sense of what we were building internally even during the turbulence last year.' Pichai highlighted several foundational moves made under his leadership, including the merger of Google Brain and DeepMind into the unified Google DeepMind team, a decision he believes has strengthened the company's AI research capabilities. He also referenced Google's early investment in Tensor Processing Units (TPUs) over a decade ago, which he said has been critical in scaling up and training large AI models like Gemini. In his characteristic calm tone, Pichai described his approach to leadership amid criticism. 'I am good at tuning out the noise and separating signal from noise,' he remarked, drawing an analogy to scuba diving. 'Sometimes, you jump in the ocean and it's choppy. But you go just a foot below, and it's the calmest thing in the universe.' He compared running Google to managing an elite football club like Barcelona or Real Madrid — where one rough season does not negate the strength of the squad or the long-term strategy. 'You watch the signals, and while some good feedback may come from the outside, internally you're making a set of consequential decisions. Many may feel inconsequential at the time, but they add up.' Despite challenges, Pichai believes Google is well-positioned in the AI landscape. 'We had to ramp up the TPUs, train Gemini, and scale our compute. To me, it seemed like the biggest opportunity space of the next decade — bigger than what we've seen before,' he said. 'We're set up better than most companies in the world.' The remarks come at a time when tech giants are fiercely competing for AI dominance, and public perception often shifts quickly based on product rollouts and visible innovation. For Pichai, however, the focus remains steady: 'Just keep things moving. We've set up the right teams, the right leaders, and we have world-class researchers.'
Hindustan Times
26-05-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Sundar Pichai to appear on Lex Fridman podcast. Now's your chance to question the CEO of Google
After interviewing Prime Minister Narendra Modi, American computer scientist Lex Fridman is going to sit down with Google CEO Sundar Pichai for what promises to be an exciting episode of his eponymous podcast. And if you have ever wanted to ask the CEO of Google a question, now is your chance. Fridman, while announcing the upcoming podcast on X, asked his followers to submit questions or suggest topics he could cover during the conversation. Unsurprisingly, the comments section of his post was quickly flooded with questions directed towards the Indian-American Google CEO - ranging from thought-provoking to downright ridiculous. Lex Fridman is an American computer scientist, artificial intelligence researcher and podcast host. He is best known for the Lex Fridman Podcast, where he conducts in-depth interviews with prominent figures across various fields, including science, technology, philosophy, politics and arts. Born as Alexei Fridman in Chkalovsk, Tajik SSR (now Buston, Tajikistan), he spent his early years in Moscow. His family moved to Chicago when he was 11 years old. After a brief tenure at Google, Fridman joined the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 2015, working with the AgeLab on projects related to autonomous vehicles and human-centered AI. 'I'm doing a podcast with Sundar Pichai soon. Let me know if you have any questions / topic suggestions,' wrote Fridman on X. The podcast is likely to focus on the AI race, with Fridman saying, 'The rate of AI progress has been insane. It makes me excited for the future (even more than usual) and excited to chat with leaders & engineers who are building that future.' Google's Gemini is at the forefront of the AI movement along with rivals like OpenAI and DeepSeek. Several of the questions that Fridman received in the comments section focused on AI, Google's way forward, privacy concerns and more. 'Google has access to one of the largest datasets in human history. What responsibility does that give you toward the future of civilization?' asked X user Paramendra Kumar Bhagat. 'I'd love to learn what's one product he wish Google had launched but didn't—because of timing, internal pushback, or market risk?' X user Paulina Szyzdek wanted to know. Some questions were more straightforward. One person asked: 'When are we getting the youtube dislike button back?' How many of these queries will actually make it to the podcast? We'll have to wait and watch.
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Lex Fridman shares will do podcast with Google CEO Sundar Pichai, invites topic suggestions
Lex Fridman has announced an upcoming interview with Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, and is inviting his audience to submit questions and topic suggestions for the conversation. Fridman shared the news on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), writing, 'I'm doing a podcast with @sundarpichai soon. Let me know if you have any questions / topic suggestions.' He noted his excitement about the rapid pace of AI development and said he looks forward to discussing the future of the technology with one of its key global leaders. While Fridman is known for deep, technically detailed conversations, he clarified that the upcoming discussion with Pichai will aim to strike a balance between high-level insights and technical depth. 'Doing a 100 hour podcast with @dhh about super-specific programming topics is a slightly different thing than talking to CEO of Google & Alphabet,' he joked, emphasizing his enthusiasm for both styles of dialogue. The episode is expected to delve into the broader implications of AI progress and Google's role in shaping its direction, reflecting Fridman's ongoing interest in both philosophical and practical dimensions of technology. Here's what Lex Fridman wrote in X post Fridman's post read: I'm doing a podcast with @sundarpichai soon. Let me know if you have any questions / topic suggestions. The rate of AI progress has been insane. It makes me excited for the future (even more than usual 🤣) and excited to chat with leaders & engineers who are building that future. PS: I'm trying to do a mix of both high-level & super-technical deep dives. Doing a 100 hour podcast with @dhh about super-specific programming topics is a slightly different thing than talking to CEO of Google & Alphabet 🤣 I really enjoy both kinds of conversations as a host and as a fan of other podcasts. AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
New York Times
20-05-2025
- Health
- New York Times
Is Red Meat Bad for Your Heart? It May Depend on Who Funded the Study.
In a review published last week in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, scientists came to a concerning conclusion. Red meat appeared healthier in studies that were funded by the red meat industry. Of course, this is not surprising to anyone familiar with nutrition research, which often has conflicts of interest because of a lack of federal funding. But it is yet another example of how industry-linked studies might shape the way people understand, and potentially misunderstand, the health consequences of what they eat. Past research funded by the sugar industry, for instance, has downplayed the relationship between sugar and health conditions like obesity and heart disease. And studies funded by the alcohol industry have suggested that moderate drinking could be part of a healthy diet. Miguel López Moreno, a researcher at Francisco de Vitoria University in Spain who led the new analysis, said in an email that he wanted to know if similar issues were happening with the research on unprocessed red meat. Processed meats like bacon and sausage have consistently been linked with heart disease risk, he said, but the evidence for unprocessed red meats like steaks and pork chops has been 'far more mixed.' The question is timely, as influential people like the U.S. health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and podcasters like Joe Rogan and Lex Fridman have spoken favorably about meat-heavy diets and downplayed the health risks of saturated fats — to public health experts' concern. We've long known that eating saturated fats, which are abundant in red meat, has been associated with cardiovascular disease. So what does this new finding tell us about how financial interests can shape how people understand what's good for them? Here's what experts say. What the New Review Found Dr. Moreno and his team from research institutions in Spain analyzed 44 clinical trials published between 1980 and 2023. The studies looked into how eating unprocessed red meat might influence participants' risk for developing cardiovascular disease, including by measuring their cholesterol, blood pressure and triglyceride levels. The 44 studies, half of which were conducted in the United States, included adults who ate either unprocessed red meat or a comparison diet for several weeks or months. Some of the studies included healthy adults, while others focused on those with risk factors for cardiovascular disease, like high cholesterol or obesity. Of the 44 studies the scientists analyzed, 29 received funding from red-meat-related industry groups like the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the National Pork Board. The remaining 15 trials were funded by government grants, academic institutions or nonprofit foundations with no industry links. Dr. Moreno and his colleagues found that the trials with funding from the read meat industry were nearly four times as likely to report favorable or neutral cardiovascular results after eating unprocessed red meat when compared with the studies with no such links. All of the independently funded studies reported either worsened or neutral cardiovascular outcomes, and those with industry funding reported either favorable or neutral outcomes. The authors of the new review reported no conflicts of interest or food industry links for themselves. A Confusing Picture for Consumers When the average person sees a bunch of trials studying one thing but getting different results, it can be challenging to know what to believe, said Deirdre Tobias, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. This can 'undermine nutrition science,' she said. These differing results may have stemmed from how the studies were set up in the first place, Dr. Tobias wrote in an editorial for the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition that accompanied the new study. Individual nutrition studies can be good at showing how the health effects of certain foods compare with those of other specific foods. But to demonstrate whether a particular food, or food group like red meat, is good or bad for health in general, scientists must look at the results from many different studies that compare it to all possible food groups and diets. The new review showed that, on the whole, the industry-funded red meat studies neglected to compare red meat to the full range of foods people might eat — including food we know to be good for the heart like whole grains or plant-based protein sources such as tofu, nuts or legumes. Instead, many of the studies compared unprocessed red meat to other types of animal protein like chicken or fish, or to carbohydrates like bagels, pasta or rice. The independently funded studies, on the other hand, compared red meat to 'the full spectrum' of different diets — including other types of meat, whole grains and heart-healthy plant foods like soy products, nuts and beans — Dr. Tobias said. This more comprehensive look offers a fuller picture of red meat's risks or benefits, she said. Of course, we can't prove that the scientists who designed the industry-funded studies omitted certain comparisons to purposefully make red meat look good, said Dr. Walter C. Willett, a professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. But the trend is pretty damning, he said. A spokeswoman for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association said in an email that 'beef farmers and ranchers support gold standard scientific research,' and that both animal and plant sources of protein can be part of a heart-healthy diet. It's true that there can be room for both sources of protein in a healthy diet, nutrition experts say. And while we could use more — and larger, longer — studies comparing high-quality plant protein sources to unprocessed red meat, Dr. Willett said, the evidence so far suggests that plant proteins are better for heart health than animal proteins high in saturated fats. What This Means for Future Nutrition Research When any food industry group — including one unrelated to the meat industry, like a soy or nut group — pays for research, the goal is often to promote and sell more of their product, said Dr. John Ioannidis, a professor of medicine, epidemiology and population health at Stanford University. That's one reason nutrition experts worry about the Trump administration's proposed $18 billion in cuts to the National Institutes of Health, which could result in more industry-sponsored research. This does not 'bode well' for the future credibility of nutrition science, said Marion Nestle, an emerita professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University. When food industry groups pay for nutrition research, she said, it's good for marketing their product, but not for science. During a webinar last week, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the new director of the N.I.H., told members of the American Society for Nutrition that the agency was going to 'focus' on nutrition under his leadership, though he did not get into any specifics on funding. The experts we spoke with were not so optimistic. Nutrition research has already been under-resourced in the United States; less than 5 percent of the N.I.H.'s budget was allocated to nutrition research in 2023, for instance. That's a 'minuscule' amount, Dr. Tobias said. The red meat study is 'an excellent example' of why the N.I.H. should be investing in nutrition research in the United States, Dr. Tobias added. 'Otherwise, we depend on industry to lead the way, with little assurance it acts in the pure interest of public health.'
