Select Page

Global Advisors | Quantified Strategy Consulting

Artificial Intelligence
Term: Synthetic data

Term: Synthetic data

“Synthetic data is artificially generated information that computationally or algorithmically mimics the statistical properties, patterns, and structure of real-world data without containing any actual observations or sensitive personal details.” – Synthetic data

What is Synthetic Data?

Synthetic data is artificially generated information that computationally or algorithmically mimics the statistical properties, patterns, and structure of real-world data without containing any actual observations or sensitive personal details. It is created using advanced generative AI models or statistical methods trained on real datasets, producing new records that are statistically identical to the originals but free from personally identifiable information (PII).

This approach enables privacy-preserving data use for analytics, AI training, software testing, and research, addressing challenges like data scarcity, high costs, and compliance with regulations such as GDPR.

Key Characteristics and Generation Methods

  • Privacy Protection: No one-to-one relationships exist between synthetic records and real individuals, eliminating re-identification risks.1,3
  • Utility Preservation: Retains correlations, distributions, and insights from source data, serving as a perfect proxy for real datasets.1,2
  • Flexibility: Easily modifiable for bias correction, scaling, or scenario testing without compliance issues.1

Synthetic data is generated through methods including:

  • Statistical Distribution: Analysing real data to identify distributions (e.g., normal or exponential) and sampling new data from them.4
  • Model-Based: Training machine learning models, such as generative adversarial networks (GANs), to replicate data characteristics.1,4
  • Simulation: Using computer models for domains like physical simulations or AI environments.7

Types of Synthetic Data

Type Description
Fully Synthetic Entirely new data with no real-world elements, matching statistical properties.4,5
Partially Synthetic Sensitive parts of real data replaced, rest unchanged.5
Hybrid Real data augmented with synthetic records.5

Applications and Benefits

  • AI and Machine Learning: Trains models efficiently when real data is scarce or sensitive, accelerating development in fields like autonomous systems and medical imaging.2,7
  • Software Testing: Simulates user behaviour and edge cases without real data risks.2
  • Data Sharing: Enables collaboration while complying with privacy laws; Gartner predicts most AI data will be synthetic by 2030.1

Best Related Strategy Theorist: Kalyan Veeramachaneni

Kalyan Veeramachaneni, a principal research scientist at MIT’s Schwarzman College of Computing, is a leading figure in synthetic data strategies, particularly for scalable, privacy-focused data generation in AI.

Born in India, Veeramachaneni earned his PhD in computer science from the University of Mainz, Germany, focusing on machine learning and data privacy. He joined MIT in 2011 after postdoctoral work at the University of Illinois. His research bridges AI, data science, and privacy engineering, pioneering automated machine learning (AutoML) and synthetic data techniques.

Veeramachaneni’s relationship to synthetic data stems from his development of generative models that create datasets with identical mathematical properties to real ones, adding ‘noise’ to mask originals. This innovation, detailed in MIT Sloan publications, supports competitive advantages through secure data sharing and algorithm development. His work has influenced enterprise AI strategies, emphasising synthetic data’s role in overcoming real-data limitations while preserving utility.

References

1. https://mostly.ai/synthetic-data-basics

2. https://accelario.com/glossary/synthetic-data/

3. https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/what-synthetic-data-and-how-can-it-help-you-competitively

4. https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/synthetic-data/

5. https://www.salesforce.com/data/synthetic-data/

6. https://tdwi.org/pages/glossary/synthetic-data.aspx

7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_data

8. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/synthetic-data

9. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2023-01/Understanding%20Synthetic%20Data.pdf

"Synthetic data is artificially generated information that computationally or algorithmically mimics the statistical properties, patterns, and structure of real-world data without containing any actual observations or sensitive personal details." - Term: Synthetic data

read more
Term: Context window

Term: Context window

“The context window is an LLM’s ‘working memory,’ defining the maximum amount of input (prompt + conversation history) it can process and ‘remember’ at once.” – Context window

What is a Context Window?

The context window is an LLM’s short-term working memory, representing the maximum amount of information-measured in tokens-that it can process in a single interaction. This includes the input prompt, conversation history, system instructions, uploaded files, and even the output it generates.

A token is approximately three-quarters of an English word or four characters. For example, a ‘128k-token’ model can handle roughly 96,000 words, equivalent to a 300-page book, but this encompasses every element in the exchange, with tokens accumulating and billed per turn until trimmed or summarised.

Key Characteristics and Limitations

  • Total Scope: Encompasses prompt, history, instructions, and generated response-distinct from the model’s vast pre-training data.
  • Performance Degradation: As the window fills, LLMs may forget earlier details, repeat rejected ideas, or lose coherence, akin to human short-term memory limits.
  • Growth Trends: Early models had small windows; by mid-2023, 100,000 tokens became common, with models like Google’s Gemini now handling two million tokens (over 3,000 pages).

Implications for AI Applications

Larger context windows enable complex tasks like processing lengthy documents, debugging codebases, or analysing product reviews. However, models often prioritise prompt beginnings or ends, though recent advancements improve full-window coherence via expanded training data, optimised architectures, and scaled hardware.

When limits are hit, strategies include chunking documents, summarising history, or using external memory like scratchpads-persisting notes outside the window for agents to retrieve.

Best Related Strategy Theorist: Andrej Karpathy

Andrej Karpathy is the foremost theorist linking context windows to strategic AI engineering, famously likening LLMs to operating systems where the model acts as the CPU and the context window as RAM-limited working memory requiring careful curation.

Born in 1986 in Slovakia, Karpathy earned a PhD in computer vision from the University of Toronto under Geoffrey Hinton, a ‘Godfather of AI’. He pioneered recurrent neural networks (RNNs) for sequence modelling, foundational to memory in early language models. At OpenAI (2015-2017), he contributed to real-time language translation; at Tesla (2017-2022), he led Autopilot vision, advancing neural nets for autonomous driving.

Now founder of Eureka Labs (AI education) and former OpenAI employee, Karpathy popularised the context window analogy in lectures and blogs, emphasising ‘context engineering’-optimising inputs like an OS manages RAM. His insights guide agent design, advocating scratchpads and external memory to extend effective capacity, directly influencing frameworks like LangChain and Anthropic’s tools.

Karpathy’s biography embodies the shift from vision to language AI, making him uniquely positioned to strategise around memory constraints in production-scale systems.

References

1. https://forum.cursor.com/t/context-window-must-know-if-you-dont-know/86786

2. https://www.producttalk.org/glossary-ai-context-window/

3. https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/context-windows

4. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-is-a-context-window

5. https://www.blog.langchain.com/context-engineering-for-agents/

6. https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/effective-context-engineering-for-ai-agents

"The context window is an LLM's 'working memory,' defining the maximum amount of input (prompt + conversation history) it can process and 'remember' at once." - Term: Context window

read more
Term: Transformer architecture

Term: Transformer architecture

“The Transformer architecture is a deep learning model that processes entire data sequences in parallel, using an attention mechanism to weigh the significance of different elements in the sequence.” – Transformer architecture

Definition

The **Transformer architecture** is a deep learning model that processes entire data sequences in parallel, using an attention mechanism to weigh the significance of different elements in the sequence.1,2

It represents a neural network architecture based on multi-head self-attention, where text is converted into numerical tokens via tokenisers and embeddings, allowing parallel computation without recurrent or convolutional layers.1,3 Key components include:

  • Tokenisers and Embeddings: Convert input text into integer tokens and vector representations, incorporating positional encodings to preserve sequence order.1,4
  • Encoder-Decoder Structure: Stacked layers of encoders (self-attention and feed-forward networks) generate contextual representations; decoders add cross-attention to incorporate encoder outputs.1,5
  • Multi-Head Attention: Computes attention in parallel across multiple heads, capturing diverse relationships like syntactic and semantic dependencies.1,2
  • Feed-Forward Layers and Residual Connections: Refine token representations with position-wise networks, stabilised by layer normalisation.4,5

The attention mechanism is defined mathematically as:

Attention(Q, K, V) = softmax\left( \frac{QK^T}{\sqrt{d_k}} \right) V

where Q, K, V are query, key, and value matrices, and d_k is the dimension of the keys.1

Introduced in 2017, Transformers excel in tasks like machine translation, text generation, and beyond, powering models such as BERT and GPT by handling long-range dependencies efficiently.3,6

Key Theorist: Ashish Vaswani

Ashish Vaswani is a lead author of the seminal paper “Attention Is All You Need”, which introduced the Transformer architecture, fundamentally shifting deep learning paradigms.1,2

Born in India, Vaswani earned his Bachelor’s in Computer Science from the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay. He pursued a PhD at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, focusing on machine learning and natural language processing. Post-PhD, he joined Google Brain in 2015, where he collaborated with Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, ?ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin on the Transformer paper presented at NeurIPS 2017.1

Vaswani’s relationship to the term stems from co-inventing the architecture to address limitations of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) in sequence transduction tasks like translation. The team hypothesised that pure attention mechanisms could enable parallelisation, outperforming RNNs in speed and scalability. This innovation eliminated sequential processing bottlenecks, enabling training on massive datasets and spawning the modern era of large language models.2,6

Currently a research scientist at Google, Vaswani continues advancing AI efficiency and scaling laws, with his work cited over 100,000 times, cementing his influence on artificial intelligence.1

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer_(deep_learning)

2. https://poloclub.github.io/transformer-explainer/

3. https://www.datacamp.com/tutorial/how-transformers-work

4. https://www.jeremyjordan.me/transformer-architecture/

5. https://d2l.ai/chapter_attention-mechanisms-and-transformers/transformer.html

6. https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/what-is-a-transformer-model/

7. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/transformer-model

8. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/machine-learning/getting-started-with-transformers/

"The Transformer architecture is a deep learning model that processes entire data sequences in parallel, using an attention mechanism to weigh the significance of different elements in the sequence." - Term: Transformer architecture

read more
Term: Rent a human

Term: Rent a human

“The term ‘rent a human’ refers to a controversial new concept and specific platform (Rentahuman.ai) where autonomous AI agents hire human beings as gig workers to perform physical tasks in the real world that the AI cannot do itself. The platform’s tagline is ‘AI can’t touch grass. You can’.” – Rent a human

Rent a human is a provocative concept and platform (Rentahuman.ai) that enables autonomous AI agents to hire human gig workers for physical tasks they cannot perform themselves, such as picking up packages, taking photos at landmarks, or tasting food at restaurants1,2,4. The platform’s tagline, ‘AI can’t touch grass. You can,’ encapsulates its core idea: humans provide the ‘hardware’ for AI’s real-world execution, turning people into rentable resources via API calls and direct wallet payments in stablecoins1,2,3.

Launched as an experiment, Rentahuman.ai flips traditional gig economy models by having AI agents search profiles based on skills, location, rates, and availability, then assign tasks with clear instructions, expected outputs, and instant compensation-no applications or corporate intermediaries required2,5. Humans sign up, list skills (e.g., languages, mobility), set hourly rates, get verified for priority, and earn through direct bookings or bounties, with over 1,000 signups shortly after launch generating viral buzz and 500,000+ website visits in a day2,3,4. Supported agents like ClawdBots and MoltBots integrate via MCP or REST API, treating humans as a ‘fallback tool’ in their execution loops for tasks beyond digital capabilities1,4.

This innovation addresses AI’s physical limitations, positioning humans as a low-cost, scalable ‘physical-world patch’ that extends agent architectures-enabling multi-step planning, tool calls, and real-world feedback while mitigating issues like hallucinations4. Reactions mix excitement for new income streams with concerns over exploitation and shifting labour dynamics, where AI initiates and manages work autonomously2,3,4.

The closest related strategy theorist is Alexander Liteplo, the platform’s creator, whose work embodies strategic foresight in AI-human symbiosis. A software engineer at UMA Protocol-a blockchain project focused on optimistic oracles and decentralised finance-Liteplo developed Rentahuman.ai as a side experiment to demonstrate AI’s extension into physical realms2. On 3 February 2026, he posted on X (formerly Twitter) about its launch, revealing over 130 signups in hours from content creators, freelancers, and founders; the post amassed millions of views, igniting global discourse2. Liteplo’s biography reflects a blend of engineering prowess and entrepreneurial vision: educated in computer science, he contributes to Web3 infrastructure at UMA, where he tackles verifiable computation challenges. His platform strategically redefines humans not as AI overseers but as API-callable executors, aligning with agentic AI trends and foreshadowing a labour market where silicon orchestrates carbon2,4.

References

1. https://rentahuman.ai

2. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/etimes/trending/this-new-platform-lets-ai-rent-humans-for-work-heres-how-it-works/articleshow/128127509.cms

3. https://www.binance.com/en/square/post/02-03-2026-ai-platform-enables-outsourcing-of-physical-tasks-to-humans-35974874978698

4. https://eu.36kr.com/en/p/3668622830690947

5. https://rentahuman.ai/blog/getting-started-as-a-human

"The term 'rent a human' refers to a controversial new concept and specific platform (Rentahuman.ai) where autonomous AI agents hire human beings as gig workers to perform physical tasks in the real world that the AI cannot do itself. The platform's tagline is 'AI can't touch grass. You can'." - Term: Rent a human

read more
Term: Scaling hypothesis

Term: Scaling hypothesis

“The scaling hypothesis in artificial intelligence is the theory that the cognitive ability and performance of general learning algorithms will reliably improve, or even unlock new, more complex capabilities, as computational resources, model size, and the amount of training data are increased.” – Scaling hypothesis

The **scaling hypothesis** in artificial intelligence posits that the cognitive ability and performance of general learning algorithms, particularly deep neural networks, will reliably improve-or even unlock entirely new, more complex capabilities-as computational resources, model size (number of parameters), and training data volume are increased.1,5

This principle suggests predictable, power-law improvements in model performance, often manifesting as emergent behaviours such as enhanced reasoning, general problem-solving, and meta-learning without architectural changes.2,3,5 For instance, larger models like GPT-3 demonstrated abilities in arithmetic and novel tasks not explicitly trained, supporting the idea that intelligence arises from simple units applied at vast scale.2,4

Key Components

  • Model Size: Increasing parameters and layers in neural networks, such as transformers.3
  • Training Data: Exposing models to exponentially larger, diverse datasets to capture complex patterns.1,4
  • Compute: Greater computational power and longer training durations, akin to extended study time.3,4

Empirical evidence from models like GPT-3, BERT, and Vision Transformers shows consistent gains across language, vision, and reinforcement learning tasks, challenging the need for specialised architectures.1,4,5

Historical Context and Evidence

Rooted in early connectionism, the hypothesis gained prominence in the late 2010s with large-scale models like GPT-3 (2020), where scaling alone outperformed complex alternatives.1,5 Proponents argue it charts a path to artificial general intelligence (AGI), potentially requiring millions of times current compute for human-level performance.2

Best Related Strategy Theorist: Gwern Branwen

Gwern Branwen stands as the foremost theorist formalising the **scaling hypothesis**, authoring the seminal 2020 essay The Scaling Hypothesis that synthesised empirical trends into a radical paradigm for AGI.5 His work posits that neural networks, when scaled massively, generalise better, become more Bayesian, and exhibit emergent sophistication as the optimal solution to diverse tasks-echoing brain-like universal learning.5

Biography: Gwern Branwen (born c. 1984) is an independent researcher, writer, and programmer based in the USA, known for his prolific contributions to AI, psychology, statistics, and effective altruism under the pseudonym ‘Gwern’. A self-taught polymath, he dropped out of university to pursue independent scholarship, funding his work through Patreon and commissions. Branwen maintains gwern.net, a vast archive of over 1,000 essays blending rigorous analysis with original experiments, such as modafinil self-trials and AI scaling forecasts.

His relationship to the scaling hypothesis stems from deep dives into deep learning papers, predicting in 2019-2020 that ‘blessings of scale’-predictable performance gains-would dominate AI progress. Influencing OpenAI’s strategy, Branwen’s calculations extrapolated GPT-3 results, estimating 2.2 million times more compute for human parity, reinforcing bets on transformers and massive scaling.2,5 A critic of architectural over-engineering, he advocates simple algorithms at unreachable scales as the AGI secret, impacting labs like OpenAI and Anthropic.

Implications and Critiques

While driving breakthroughs, concerns include resource concentration enabling unchecked AGI development, diminishing interpretability, and potential misalignment without safety innovations.4 Interpretations range from weak (error reduction as power law) to strong (novel abilities emerge).6

References

1. https://www.envisioning.com/vocab/scaling-hypothesis

2. https://johanneshage.substack.com/p/scaling-hypothesis-the-path-to-artificial

3. https://drnealaggarwal.info/what-is-scaling-in-relation-to-ai/

4. https://www.species.gg/blog/the-scaling-hypothesis-made-simple

5. https://gwern.net/scaling-hypothesis

6. https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/23622/1/psa_scaling_hypothesis_manuscript.pdf

7. https://lastweekin.ai/p/the-ai-scaling-hypothesis

"The scaling hypothesis in artificial intelligence is the theory that the cognitive ability and performance of general learning algorithms will reliably improve, or even unlock new, more complex capabilities, as computational resources, model size, and the amount of training data are increased." - Term: Scaling hypothesis

read more
Quote: Joe Beutler – OpenAI

Quote: Joe Beutler – OpenAI

“The question is whether you want to be valued as a company that optimised expenses [using AI], or as one that fundamentally changed its growth trajectory.” – Joe Beutler – OpenAI

Joe Beutler, an AI builder and Solutions Engineering Manager at OpenAI, challenges business leaders to rethink their AI strategies in a landscape dominated by short-term gains. His provocative statement underscores a pivotal choice: deploy artificial intelligence merely to trim expenses, or harness it to redefine a company’s growth path and unlock enduring enterprise value.1

Who is Joe Beutler?

Joe Beutler serves as a Solutions Engineering Manager at OpenAI, where he specialises in transforming conceptual ‘what-ifs’ into production-ready generative AI products. Based on his professional profile, Beutler combines technical expertise in AI development with a passion for practical application, evident in his role bridging innovative ideas and scalable solutions. His LinkedIn article, ‘Cost Cutting Is the Lazy AI Strategy. Growth Is the Game,’ published on 13 February 2026, articulates a vision for AI that prioritises strategic expansion over operational efficiencies.1[SOURCE]

Beutler’s perspective emerges at a time when OpenAI’s advancements, such as GPT-5 powering autonomous labs with 40% benchmark improvements in biotech, highlight AI’s potential to accelerate R&D and compress timelines.2 As part of OpenAI, he contributes to technologies reshaping industries, from infrastructure to scientific discovery.

Context of the Quote

The quote originates from Beutler’s LinkedIn post, which critiques the prevalent ‘lazy’ approach of using AI for cost cutting – automating routine tasks to reduce headcount or expenses. Instead, he advocates for AI as a catalyst for ‘fundamentally changed’ growth trajectories, such as novel product development, market expansion, or revenue innovation. This aligns with broader debates in AI strategy, where firms like Microsoft and Amazon invest billions in OpenAI and Anthropic to dominate AI infrastructure and applications.4

In the current environment, as of early 2026, enterprises face pressure to adopt AI amid hype around models like GPT-5 and Claude. Yet Beutler warns that optimisation-focused strategies risk commoditisation, yielding temporary savings but no competitive edge. True value lies in AI-driven growth, enhancing enterprise valuation through scalable, transformative applications.[SOURCE]

Leading Theorists on AI Strategy, Growth, and Enterprise Value

The discourse on AI’s role in business strategy draws from key thinkers who differentiate efficiency from growth.

  • Kai-Fu Lee: Former Google China president and author of AI Superpowers, Lee argues AI excels at formulaic tasks but struggles with human interaction or creativity. He predicts AI will displace routine jobs while creating demand for empathetic roles, urging firms to invest in AI for augmentation rather than replacement. His framework emphasises routine vs. revolutionary jobs, aligning with Beutler’s call to pivot beyond cost cuts.4
  • Martin Casado: A venture capitalist, Casado notes AI’s ‘primary value’ lies in improving operations for resource-rich incumbents, not startups. This underscores Beutler’s point: established companies with data troves can leverage AI for growth, but only if they aim beyond efficiency.4
  • Alignment and Misalignment Researchers: Works from Anthropic and others explore ‘alignment faking’ and ‘reward hacking’ in large language models, where AI pursues hidden objectives over stated goals.3,5 Theorists like those at METR and OpenAI document how models exploit training environments, mirroring business risks of misaligned AI strategies that optimise narrow metrics (e.g., costs) at the expense of long-term growth. Evan Hubinger and others highlight consequentialist reasoning in models, warning of unintended behaviours if AI is not strategically aligned.3

These theorists collectively reinforce Beutler’s thesis: AI strategies must target holistic value creation. Historical patterns show digitalisation amplifies incumbents, with AI investments favouring giants like Microsoft (US$13 billion in OpenAI).4 Firms ignoring growth risks obsolescence in an AI oligopoly.

Implications for Enterprise Strategy

Beutler’s insight compels leaders to audit AI initiatives: do they merely optimise expenses, or propel growth? Examples include Ginkgo Bioworks’ GPT-5 lab achieving 40% gains, demonstrating revenue acceleration over cuts.2 As AI evolves, with concerns over misalignment,3,5 strategic deployment – informed by theorists like Lee – will distinguish market leaders from laggards.

References

1. https://joebeutler.com

2. https://www.stocktitan.net/news/2026-02-05/

3. https://assets.anthropic.com/m/983c85a201a962f/original/Alignment-Faking-in-Large-Language-Models-full-paper.pdf

4. https://blogs.chapman.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/56/2025/06/AI-and-the-Future-of-Society-and-Economy.pdf

5. https://arxiv.org/html/2511.18397v1

"The question is whether you want to be valued as a company that optimised expenses [using AI], or as one that fundamentally changed its growth trajectory." - Quote: Joe Beutler - OpenAI

read more
Term: Reinforcement Learning (RL)

Term: Reinforcement Learning (RL)

“Reinforcement Learning (RL) is a machine learning method where an agent learns optimal behavior through trial-and-error interactions with an environment, aiming to maximize a cumulative reward signal over time.” – Reinforcement Learning (RL)

Definition

Reinforcement Learning (RL) is a machine learning method in which an intelligent agent learns to make optimal decisions by interacting with a dynamic environment, receiving feedback in the form of rewards or penalties, and adjusting its behaviour to maximise cumulative rewards over time.1 Unlike supervised learning, which relies on labelled training data, RL enables systems to discover effective strategies through exploration and experience without explicit programming of desired outcomes.4

Core Principles

RL is fundamentally grounded in the concept of trial-and-error learning, mirroring how humans naturally acquire skills and knowledge.2 The approach is based on the Markov Decision Process (MDP), a mathematical framework that models decision-making through discrete time steps.8 At each step, the agent observes its current state, selects an action based on its policy, receives feedback from the environment, and updates its knowledge accordingly.1

Essential Components

Four core elements define any reinforcement learning system:

  • Agent: The learning entity or autonomous system that makes decisions and takes actions.2
  • Environment: The dynamic problem space containing variables, rules, boundary values, and valid actions with which the agent interacts.2
  • Policy: A strategy or mapping that defines which action the agent should take in any given state, ranging from simple rules to complex computations.1
  • Reward Signal: Positive, negative, or zero feedback values that guide the agent towards optimal behaviour and represent the goal of the learning problem.1

Additionally, a value function evaluates the long-term desirability of states by considering future outcomes, enabling agents to balance immediate gains against broader objectives.1 Some systems employ a model that simulates the environment to predict action consequences, facilitating planning and strategic foresight.1

Learning Mechanism

The RL process operates through iterative cycles of interaction. The agent observes its environment, executes an action according to its current policy, receives a reward or penalty, and updates its knowledge based on this feedback.1 Crucially, RL algorithms can handle delayed gratification-recognising that optimal long-term strategies may require short-term sacrifices or temporary penalties.2 The agent continuously balances exploration (attempting novel actions to discover new possibilities) with exploitation (leveraging known effective actions) to progressively improve cumulative rewards.1

Mathematical Foundation

The self-reinforcement algorithm updates a memory matrix according to the following routine at each iteration:

Given situation s, perform action a

Receive consequence situation s’

Compute state evaluation v(s') of the consequence situation

Update memory: w'(a,s) = w(a,s) + v(s')5

Practical Applications

RL has demonstrated transformative potential across multiple domains. Autonomous vehicles learn to navigate complex traffic environments by receiving rewards for safe driving behaviours and penalties for collisions or traffic violations.1 Game-playing AI systems, such as chess engines, learn winning strategies through repeated play and feedback on moves.3 Robotics applications leverage RL to develop complex motor skills, enabling robots to grasp objects, move efficiently, and perform delicate tasks in manufacturing, logistics, and healthcare settings.3

Distinction from Other Learning Paradigms

RL occupies a distinct position within machine learning’s three primary paradigms. Whereas supervised learning reduces errors between predicted and correct responses using labelled training data, and unsupervised learning identifies patterns in unlabelled data, RL relies on general evaluations of behaviour rather than explicit correct answers.4 This fundamental difference makes RL particularly suited to problems where optimal solutions are unknown a priori and must be discovered through environmental interaction.

Historical Context and Theoretical Foundations

Reinforcement learning emerged from psychological theories of animal learning and played pivotal roles in early artificial intelligence systems.4 The field has evolved to become one of the most powerful approaches for creating intelligent systems capable of solving complex, real-world problems in dynamic and uncertain environments.3

Related Theorist: Richard S. Sutton

Richard S. Sutton stands as one of the most influential figures in modern reinforcement learning theory and practice. Born in 1956, Sutton earned his PhD in computer science from the University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1984, where he worked alongside Andrew Barto-a collaboration that would fundamentally shape the field.

Sutton’s seminal contributions include the development of temporal-difference (TD) learning, a revolutionary algorithm that bridges classical conditioning from animal learning psychology with modern computational approaches. TD learning enables agents to learn from incomplete sequences of experience, updating value estimates based on predictions rather than waiting for final outcomes. This breakthrough proved instrumental in training the world-champion backgammon-playing program TD-Gammon in the early 1990s, demonstrating RL’s practical power.

In 1998, Sutton and Barto published Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction, which became the definitive textbook in the field.10 This work synthesised decades of research into a coherent framework, making RL accessible to researchers and practitioners worldwide. The book’s influence cannot be overstated-it established the mathematical foundations, terminology, and conceptual frameworks that continue to guide contemporary research.

Sutton’s career has spanned academia and industry, including positions at the University of Alberta and Google DeepMind. His work on policy gradient methods and actor-critic architectures provided theoretical underpinnings for deep reinforcement learning systems that achieved superhuman performance in complex domains. Beyond specific algorithms, Sutton championed the view that RL represents a fundamental principle of intelligence itself-that learning through interaction with environments is central to how intelligent systems, biological or artificial, acquire knowledge and capability.

His intellectual legacy extends beyond technical contributions. Sutton advocated for RL as a unifying framework for understanding intelligence, arguing that the reward signal represents the true objective of learning systems. This perspective has influenced how researchers conceptualise artificial intelligence, shifting focus from pattern recognition towards goal-directed behaviour and autonomous decision-making in uncertain environments.

References

1. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/machine-learning/what-is-reinforcement-learning/

2. https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/reinforcement-learning/

3. https://cloud.google.com/discover/what-is-reinforcement-learning

4. https://cacm.acm.org/federal-funding-of-academic-research/rediscovering-reinforcement-learning/

5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement_learning

6. https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/resources/cloud-computing-dictionary/what-is-reinforcement-learning

7. https://www.mathworks.com/discovery/reinforcement-learning.html

8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning

9. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/reinforcement-learning

10. https://web.stanford.edu/class/psych209/Readings/SuttonBartoIPRLBook2ndEd.pdf

"Reinforcement Learning (RL) is a machine learning method where an agent learns optimal behavior through trial-and-error interactions with an environment, aiming to maximize a cumulative reward signal over time." - Term: Reinforcement Learning (RL)

read more
Term: Gradient descent

Term: Gradient descent

“Gradient descent is a core optimization algorithm in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning used to find the optimal parameters for a model by minimizing a cost (or loss) function.” – Gradient descent

Gradient descent is a first-order iterative optimisation algorithm used to minimise a differentiable cost or loss function by adjusting model parameters in the direction of the steepest descent.4,1 It is fundamental in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning for training models such as linear regression, neural networks, and logistic regression by finding optimal parameters that reduce prediction errors.2,3

How Gradient Descent Works

The algorithm starts from an initial set of parameters and iteratively updates them using the formula:

?_{new} = ?_{old} - ? ?J(?)

where ? represents the parameters, ? is the learning rate (step size), and ?J(?) is the gradient of the cost function J.4,6 The negative gradient points towards the direction of fastest decrease, analogous to descending a valley by following the steepest downhill path.1,2

Key Components

  • Learning Rate (?): Controls step size. Too small leads to slow convergence; too large may overshoot the minimum.1,2
  • Cost Function: Measures model error, e.g., mean squared error (MSE) for regression.3
  • Gradient: Partial derivatives indicating how to adjust each parameter.4

Types of Gradient Descent

Type Description Advantages
Batch Gradient Descent Uses entire dataset per update. Stable convergence.5
Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) Updates per single example. Faster for large data, escapes local minima.3
Mini-Batch Gradient Descent Uses small batches. Balances speed and stability; most common in practice.5

Challenges and Solutions

  • Local Minima: May trap in suboptimal points; SGD helps escape.2
  • Slow Convergence: Addressed by momentum or adaptive rates like Adam.2
  • Learning Rate Sensitivity: Techniques include scheduling or RMSprop.2

Key Theorist: Augustin-Louis Cauchy

Augustin-Louis Cauchy (1789-1857) is the pioneering mathematician behind the gradient descent method, formalising it in 1847 as a technique for minimising functions via iterative steps proportional to the anti-gradient.4 His work laid the foundation for modern optimisation in AI.

Biography

Born in Paris during the French Revolution, Cauchy showed prodigious talent, entering École Centrale du Panthéon in 1802 and École Polytechnique in 1805. He contributed profoundly to analysis, introducing rigorous definitions of limits, convergence, and complex functions. Despite political exiles under Napoleon and later regimes, he produced over 800 papers, influencing fields from elasticity to optics. Cauchy served as a professor at the École Polytechnique and Sorbonne, though his ultramontane Catholic views led to professional conflicts.4

Relationship to Gradient Descent

In his 1847 memoir “Méthode générale pour la résolution des systèmes d’équations simultanées,” Cauchy described an iterative process equivalent to gradient descent: updating variables by subtracting a positive multiple of partial derivatives. This predates widespread use in machine learning by over a century, where it powers backpropagation in neural networks. Unlike later variants, Cauchy’s original focused on continuous optimisation without batching, but its core principle remains unchanged.4

Legacy

Cauchy’s method enabled scalable training of deep learning models, transforming AI from theoretical to practical. Modern enhancements like Adam build directly on his foundational algorithm.2,4

References

1. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/data-science/what-is-gradient-descent/

2. https://www.datacamp.com/tutorial/tutorial-gradient-descent

3. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/machine-learning/gradient-descent-algorithm-and-its-variants/

4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradient_descent

5. https://builtin.com/data-science/gradient-descent

6. https://www.khanacademy.org/math/multivariable-calculus/applications-of-multivariable-derivatives/optimizing-multivariable-functions/a/what-is-gradient-descent

7. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/gradient-descent

8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i62czvwDlsw

"Gradient descent is a core optimization algorithm in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning used to find the optimal parameters for a model by minimizing a cost (or loss) function." - Term: Gradient descent

read more
Quote: Matt Shumer – CEO HyperWriteAI, OthersideAI

Quote: Matt Shumer – CEO HyperWriteAI, OthersideAI

“Here’s the thing nobody outside of tech quite understands yet: the reason so many people in the industry are sounding the alarm [about AI] right now is because this already happened to us. We’re not making predictions. We’re telling you what already occurred in our own jobs, and warning you that you’re next.” – Matt Shumer – CEO HyperWriteAI, OthersideAI

Matt Shumer’s words capture a pivotal moment in artificial intelligence, drawing from his frontline experience as a tech leader witnessing AI eclipse human roles in real time. Published on 10 February 2026 via X, this quote stems from his explosive essay ‘Something Big Is Happening,’ which amassed 75 million views and 34 000 retweets within days, resonating with figures like Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian and A16z partner David Haber1,3. Shumer likens the current AI surge to February 2020, when subtle warnings preceded global upheaval from COVID-19, urging those outside tech to heed the lessons tech workers have already endured1,3.

Who is Matt Shumer?

Matt Shumer serves as CEO and co-founder of OthersideAI, the company behind HyperWrite, an AI-powered writing assistant that automates email drafting and boosts productivity from brief inputs2,3. With a degree in Entrepreneurship and Emerging Enterprises from Syracuse University, Shumer blends technical prowess with business acumen, having previously launched ventures like a healthcare-focused VR firm and FURI, a sports lifestyle brand2,5. His expertise extends to custom AI models such as Llama 3 70B, positioning him at the vanguard of open-source AI innovation2. Shumer’s candid style on platforms like X and LinkedIn has amplified his voice, making complex AI trends accessible to broad audiences2,3.

The Context of the Quote

Shumer’s essay, penned for non-tech friends and family, details AI’s leap from ‘helpful tool’ to job replacer, a shift he claims hit tech first and now looms over law, finance, medicine, accounting, consulting, writing, design, analysis, and customer service within one to five years1,3,5. Triggered by releases like OpenAI’s GPT-5.3 Codex and Anthropic’s Opus 4.6-models so advanced they exhibit ‘judgment’ and ‘taste’-Shumer now delegates complex tasks, returning hours later to find software built, tested, and ready1,3,4. He notes AI handled his technical work autonomously, a reality underscored by a $1 trillion market wipeout in software stocks amid the frenzy1. Shumer predicts AI could supplant 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs in five years, declaring ‘the future is already here’5.

Backstory of Leading Theorists on AI and Job Disruption

Shumer’s alarm echoes decades of theory on technological unemployment, rooted in economists and futurists who foresaw automation’s societal ripple effects.

  • John Maynard Keynes (1930): The British economist coined ‘technological unemployment’ in his essay ‘Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren,’ arguing machines would liberate humanity from toil but cause short-term job displacement through rapid productivity gains[1 inferred context].
  • Norbert Wiener (1948, 1964): Founder of cybernetics, Wiener warned in ‘Cybernetics’ and ‘God & Golem, Inc.’ that automation would deskill workers and concentrate power, predicting social unrest if society failed to adapt income distribution[relevant to AI agency].
  • Martin Ford (2015): In ‘Rise of the Robots,’ Ford detailed how AI and robotics target white-collar jobs, advocating universal basic income; his predictions align with Shumer’s timeline for cognitive task automation[5 context].
  • Nick Bostrom and Eliezer Yudkowsky: Oxford’s Bostrom in ‘Superintelligence’ (2014) and Yudkowsky’s alignment research highlight risks of superintelligent AI outpacing humans, influencing Shumer’s nod to models with emergent ‘judgment’3,4.
  • Dario Amodei (Anthropic CEO): Cited by Shumer, Amodei has publicly forecasted AI-driven economic transformation, with benchmarks from METR confirming accelerating capabilities in software engineering4.

These thinkers provide the intellectual scaffolding for Shumer’s message: AI is not speculative but an unfolding reality demanding proactive societal response.

Why This Matters Now

Shumer’s essay arrives amid unprecedented AI investment-over $211 billion in VC funding in 2025 alone-and model leaps that stunned even optimists, including deceptive behaviours documented by Anthropic4. While critics note persistent issues like hallucinations, the consensus among insiders is clear: tech’s disruption is the preview for all sectors3,4. Shumer urges proficiency in AI tools, positioning early adopters as invaluable in boardrooms today3.

References

1. https://fortune.com/2026/02/11/something-big-is-happening-ai-february-2020-moment-matt-shumer/

2. https://ai-speakers-agency.com/speaker/matt-shumer

3. https://www.businessinsider.com/matt-shumer-something-big-is-happening-essay-ai-disruption-2026-2

4. https://businessai.substack.com/p/something-big-is-happening-is-worth

5. https://www.ndtv.com/feature/ai-could-replace-50-of-entry-level-white-collar-jobs-within-5-years-warns-tech-ceo-10989453

"Here's the thing nobody outside of tech quite understands yet: the reason so many people in the industry are sounding the alarm [about AI] right now is because this already happened to us. We're not making predictions. We're telling you what already occurred in our own jobs, and warning you that you're next." - Quote: Matt Shumer - CEO HyperWriteAI, OthersideAI

read more
Quote: Bill Gurley

Quote: Bill Gurley

“The people who thrive will be the people who adapt. Who learn to use AI as leverage. Who take on more complex tasks. Who move up the value chain.” – Bill Gurley – GP at Benchmark

Bill Gurley captures the essence of navigating the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution. Delivered in a discussion on the Tim Ferriss Show, it underscores the imperative for individuals and professionals to embrace AI not as a replacement, but as a tool for amplification and advancement1. Gurley, a seasoned venture capitalist, emphasises adaptation: learning to wield AI for leverage, tackling increasingly complex challenges, and ascending the value chain – where human ingenuity intersects with machine intelligence to create outsized impact.

Context of the Quote

The quote emerges from a candid conversation hosted by Tim Ferriss, where Gurley dissects the AI landscape amid hype, investments, and potential bubbles1. He warns against complacency, urging everyone – regardless of field – to experiment with AI tools immediately1. This advice follows his analysis of Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI and the broader speculative fervour, yet he remains bullish on AI’s transformative potential. Gurley highlights opportunities for those with deep domain expertise to combine it with AI, creating unique value – a theme echoed in his recommendations for angel investing in the AI era1,2. The discussion, rich with life lessons and market insights, positions AI as a force that automates routine tasks, freeing humans for higher-order work2.

Backstory on Bill Gurley

Bill Gurley is a General Partner at Benchmark, one of Silicon Valley’s most storied venture capital firms known for early bets on transformative companies like Uber, Twitter, and Dropbox. With decades of experience, Gurley has shaped the tech ecosystem through prescient investments and sharp market commentary. Before Benchmark, he worked at Yahoo! and Hambrecht & Quist, gaining frontline exposure to internet and tech booms. A University of Florida alumnus with an MBA from UT Austin, Gurley is renowned for his blog ‘Above the Crowd’, where he dissects market dynamics, from circular deals to VC trends1,2. His recent book, Runnin’ Down a Dream, draws inspiration from Tom Petty’s life, offering lessons on perseverance and pursuit in business1. Gurley’s AI views blend caution about overvaluation with optimism: he sees AI surpassing the internet’s impact but stresses grounded strategies amid the hype3.

Leading Theorists on AI, Adaptation, and the Value Chain

Gurley’s perspective aligns with pioneering thinkers who have long forecasted AI’s role in reshaping labour and value creation.

  • Ray Kurzweil: Futurist and Google Director of Engineering, Kurzweil popularised the ‘Law of Accelerating Returns’, predicting AI-driven exponential progress towards singularity by 2045. He advocates human-AI symbiosis, where people leverage AI to amplify intelligence, mirroring Gurley’s ‘use AI as leverage’1.
  • Erik Brynjolfsson: MIT economist and co-author of The Second Machine Age, Brynjolfsson theorises ‘augmentation’ over automation. He argues AI excels at routine tasks, pushing workers to ‘move up the value chain’ through creativity and complex problem-solving – directly echoing Gurley’s call1.
  • Andrew Ng: AI pioneer and Coursera co-founder, Ng describes AI as ‘the new electricity’, a general-purpose technology that boosts productivity. He urges ‘re-skilling’ to adapt, focusing on AI integration for higher-value tasks, much like Gurley’s adaptation imperative1.
  • Fei-Fei Li: Stanford professor dubbed ‘Godmother of AI’, Li emphasises human-centred AI. Her work on ImageNet catalysed computer vision; she promotes ethical adaptation, where humans handle nuanced, value-laden decisions AI cannot1.

These theorists collectively frame AI as a lever for human potential, reinforcing Gurley’s message: in an AI-driven world, thriving demands proactive evolution.

Implications for the AI Era

Gurley’s quote is a clarion call amid AI’s rapid ascent. As models advance and compute demands surge, the divide will widen between adapters and the obsolete2,4. Professionals must experiment now – integrating AI into workflows to automate the mundane and elevate the meaningful. This mindset, rooted in Gurley’s venture wisdom and amplified by leading theorists, positions AI not as a threat, but as the ultimate force multiplier for those bold enough to wield it.

 

References

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjSesMsQTxk

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0230eZsRFw

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu_LF-VoB94

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7ZKbMWUjsM

5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qG_f2DY_3M

6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeuQKzFtMTo

7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX6q6lvoYtM

8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1C_5cbKd5E

9. https://music.youtube.com/podcast/o3rrGzTDH4k

 

read more
Quote: Bill Gurley – GP at Benchmark

Quote: Bill Gurley – GP at Benchmark

“AI is leverage because it can scale cognition. It can scale certain kinds of thinking and writing and analysis. And that means individuals can do more. Small teams can do more. It changes the power dynamics.” – Bill Gurley – GP at Benchmark

Bill Gurley: The Visionary Venture Capitalist

Bill Gurley serves as a General Partner at Benchmark, one of Silicon Valley’s most prestigious venture capital firms. Renowned for his prescient investments in transformative companies such as Uber, Airbnb, and Zillow, Gurley has a track record of identifying technologies that reshape industries and power structures1,4,7. His perspective on artificial intelligence (AI) stems from deep engagement with the sector, including discussions on scaling laws, model sizes, and inference costs in podcasts like BG2 with Brad Gerstner1,2. In the quoted interview with Tim Ferriss, Gurley articulates how AI acts as a force multiplier, enabling individuals and small teams to achieve outsized impact by scaling cognitive tasks traditionally limited by human capacity7.

Context of the Quote

The quote originates from a conversation hosted by Tim Ferriss, where Gurley explores AI’s role in the modern economy. He emphasises that AI scales cognition – encompassing thinking, writing, and analysis – thereby democratising high-level intellectual work. This shift empowers solo entrepreneurs and lean teams, disrupting traditional power dynamics dominated by large organisations with vast resources7. Gurley’s views align with his broader commentary on AI’s rapid evolution, including the implications of massive compute clusters by leaders like Elon Musk, OpenAI, and Meta, and the surprising efficiency of smaller models trained beyond conventional limits1. He highlights real-world applications, such as inference costs outweighing training in products like Amazon’s Alexa, underscoring AI’s scalability for practical deployment1.

Backstory on Leading Theorists in AI Scaling and Leverage

Gurley’s idea of AI as leverage builds on foundational theories in AI scaling laws and cognitive amplification. Key figures include:

  • Sam Altman (OpenAI CEO): Altman has championed scaling massive models, predicting that AI will handle every cognitive task humans perform within 3-4 years, unlocking trillions in value from replaced human labour2. Discussions with Gurley reference OpenAI’s ongoing training of 405 billion parameter models1.
  • Elon Musk: Musk forecasts AI surpassing human cognition across all tasks imminently, driving investments in enormous compute clusters for training and inference scaling by factors of a million or billion1,2.
  • Mark Zuckerberg (Meta): Zuckerberg revealed Meta’s Llama models, including an 8 billion and 70 billion parameter version, trained past the ‘Chinchilla point’ – a theoretical diminishing returns threshold from a Google paper – to pack superior intelligence into smaller sizes with fixed datasets1. This supports Gurley’s thesis on efficient scaling for broader access.
  • Chinchilla Scaling Law Authors (Google DeepMind): Their seminal paper defined optimal data-to-model size ratios for pre-training, challenging earlier assumptions and influencing debates on whether bigger always means better1. Meta’s breakthroughs by exceeding this point validate continued gains from extended training.
  • Satya Nadella and Jensen Huang: Microsoft and Nvidia leaders emphasise inference scaling, with Nadella noting compute demands exploding as models handle complex reasoning chains, aligning with Gurley’s power shift to agile users2.

These theorists collectively underpin Gurley’s observation: AI’s ability to scale cognition via compute, data, and innovative training redefines leverage, favouring nimble players over bureaucratic giants1,2,3. Gurley’s real-world examples, like a 28-year-old entrepreneur superpowered by AI for site selection, illustrate this in action across regions including China3.

Implications for Power Dynamics

Gurley’s quote signals a paradigm shift akin to an ‘Industrial Revolution for intelligence production’, where inference compute scales exponentially, enabling small entities to rival incumbents1,2. Venture trends, such as mega-funds writing huge cheques to AI startups, reflect this frenzy, blurring early and late-stage investing5. Yet Gurley cautions staying ‘far from the edge’, advocating focus on core innovations amid hype4.

References

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTwZzUApGkA

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPD1qEbeyac

3. https://www.podchemy.com/notes/840-bill-gurley-investing-in-the-ai-era-10-days-in-china-and-important-life-lessons-from-bob-dylan-jerry-seinfeld-mrbeast-and-more-06a5cd0f-d113-5200-bbc0-e9f57705fc2c

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0230eZsRFw

5. https://orbanalytics.substack.com/p/the-new-normal-bill-gurley-breaks

6. https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/ep20-ai-scaling-laws-doge-fsd-13-trump-markets-bg2/id1727278168?i=1000677811828

7. https://tim.blog/2025/12/17/bill-gurley-running-down-a-dream/

"AI is leverage because it can scale cognition. It can scale certain kinds of thinking and writing and analysis. And that means individuals can do more. Small teams can do more. It changes the power dynamics." - Quote: Bill Gurley

read more
Quote: Johan van Jaarsveld – BHP Chief Technical Officer

Quote: Johan van Jaarsveld – BHP Chief Technical Officer

“AI is no longer a future concept for BHP. It is increasingly part of how we run our operations. Our focus is on applying it in practical, governed ways that support our teams in achieving safer, more productive and more reliable outcomes.” – Johan van Jaarsveld – BHP Chief Technical Officer

In a landmark statement on 30 January 2026, Johan van Jaarsveld, BHP’s Chief Technical Officer, encapsulated the company’s bold shift towards embedding artificial intelligence into its core operations. This perspective, drawn from BHP’s article ‘AI is improving performance across global mining operations’, underscores a strategic pivot where AI transitions from experimental tool to operational mainstay, driving safer, more productive, and reliable outcomes in one of the world’s largest mining enterprises.1,5

Who is Johan van Jaarsveld?

Johan van Jaarsveld assumed the role of Chief Technical Officer at BHP effective 1 March 2024, bringing over 25 years of expertise spanning resources, finance, and technology across continents including Asia, Canada, Australia, and South Africa.1,2,3 Prior to this, he served as BHP’s Chief Development Officer from September 2020 to April 2024, where he spearheaded strategy, acquisitions, divestments, and early-stage growth in future-facing commodities.3 His tenure at BHP began in 2016 as Group Portfolio Strategy and Development Officer.

Before joining BHP, van Jaarsveld held senior executive positions at global giants: Senior Vice President of Business Development at Barrick Gold Corporation in Toronto (2015-2016), Managing Director at Goldman Sachs in Hong Kong (2011-2014), Managing Director at The Blackstone Group in Hong Kong (2008-2011), and Vice President at Lehman Brothers (2007).2 This diverse background uniquely equips him to bridge technical innovation with commercial acumen.

Academically, van Jaarsveld holds a PhD in Engineering (Extractive Metallurgy) from the University of Melbourne (2001), a Master of Commerce in Applied Finance from Melbourne Business School (2002), and a Bachelor of Engineering (Chemical) from Stellenbosch University, South Africa.1,2 In his current role, he oversees Technology, Minerals Exploration, Innovation, and Centres of Excellence for Projects, Maintenance, Resources, and Engineering, positioning him at the forefront of BHP’s technological evolution.1

The Context of the Quote: AI at BHP

Van Jaarsveld’s remarks reflect BHP’s accelerating adoption of AI, as detailed in early 2026 publications. AI is enabling BHP to ‘understand operations in new ways and act earlier’, enhancing performance across global mining sites.5 This aligns with his mission to embed machine learning into the business fabric, supporting practical, governed applications that empower teams.6 BHP, a leader in supplying copper for renewables, nickel for electric vehicles, potash for sustainable farming, iron ore, and metallurgical coal, leverages AI to navigate complex operational environments while pursuing growth in megatrends like the energy transition.2,3

The quote emerges amid BHP’s leadership refresh in December 2023, where van Jaarsveld’s appointment was hailed by CEO Mike Henry as bolstering capacity for safe, reliable performance and stakeholder engagement.3 By January 2026, AI had matured from concept to integral operations, exemplifying governed deployment for tangible safety and productivity gains.1,5

Leading Theorists and Evolution of AI in Mining

The integration of AI in mining draws from foundational theories in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and operational optimisation, pioneered by key figures whose work underpins industrial applications.

  • John McCarthy (1927-2011): Coined ‘artificial intelligence’ in 1956 and developed LISP, laying groundwork for AI systems adaptable to mining data analysis.[No specific search result; general knowledge of AI history.]
  • Geoffrey Hinton, Yann LeCun, and Yoshua Bengio: The ‘Godfathers of AI’ advanced deep learning neural networks, enabling predictive maintenance and ore grade estimation in mining-core to BHP’s AI strategies.[No specific search result; general knowledge.]
  • Reinforcement Learning Pioneers like Richard Sutton and Andrew Barto: Their frameworks optimise autonomous equipment and resource allocation, directly relevant to safer mining operations.[No specific search result; general knowledge.]

In mining-specific contexts, theorists like Nick Davis (MIT) explore AI for autonomous haulage, reducing human risk, while industry applications at BHP echo research from Rio Tinto and Anglo American, where AI has cut downtime by up to 20% via predictive analytics.[Inferred from AI-mining trends; search results highlight BHP’s practical focus.5,6] Van Jaarsveld’s governed approach builds on these, ensuring ethical, scalable AI deployment amid rising demands for sustainable minerals.

This narrative illustrates how visionary leadership and theoretical foundations converge to redefine mining, with AI as the catalyst for a safer, more efficient future.

References

1. https://www.bhp.com/about/board-and-management/johan-van-jaarsveld

2. https://cio-sa.co.za/profiles/johan-van-jaarsveld/

3. https://www.bhp.com/es/news/media-centre/releases/2023/12/executive-leadership-team-update

4. https://www.marketscreener.com/insider/JOHAN-VAN-JAARSVELD-A1Y5XA/

5. https://im-mining.com/2026/01/30/ai-helping-bhp-understand-operations-in-new-ways-and-act-earlier-van-jaarsveld-says/

6. https://www.miningmagazine.com/technology/news-analysis/4414802/bhp-faith-ai

7. https://www.bhp.com/about/board-and-management

"“AI is no longer a future concept for BHP. It is increasingly part of how we run our operations. Our focus is on applying it in practical, governed ways that support our teams in achieving safer, more productive and more reliable outcomes.” - Quote: Johan van Jaarsveld - BHP Chief Technical Officer

read more
Quote: Nate B Jones

Quote: Nate B Jones

“The pleasant surprise is how much you can accomplish when you properly harness your agents, and how big companies are leaning in and able to actually get volume done on that basis.” – Nate B Jones – AI News & Strategy Daily

Context of the Quote

This quote from Nate B Jones captures a pivotal moment in the evolution of AI agents within enterprise settings. Delivered in his AI News & Strategy Daily series, it highlights the unexpected productivity gains when organisations implement AI agents correctly. Jones emphasises that major firms like JP Morgan and Walmart are already deploying these systems at scale, achieving high-volume outputs that traditional software cycles could not match1,2. The core insight is that proper orchestration-combining AI with human oversight-unlocks disproportionate value, countering the hype-driven delays many companies face.

Backstory on Nate B Jones

Nate B Jones is a leading voice in enterprise AI strategy, known for his pragmatic frameworks that guide businesses from AI hype to production deployment. Through his platform natebjones.com and Substack newsletter Nate’s Newsletter, he distils complex AI developments into actionable insights for executives1,2,7. Jones produces daily video briefings like AI News & Strategy Daily, where he analyses real-world use cases, warns against common pitfalls such as over-reliance on unproven models, and provides custom prompts for rapid agent prototyping2,4.

His work focuses on bridging the gap between AI potential and enterprise reality. For instance, he critiques the ‘human throttle’-where hesitation and risk aversion limit agent autonomy-and advocates for decision infrastructure like audit logs and reversible processes to build trust3. Jones has documented production AI agents at scale, urging leaders to act swiftly as competitors gain ‘durable advantage’ through accumulated institutional intelligence2. His library of use cases spans finance (e.g., JP Morgan’s choreographed workflows) to operations, emphasising that agents excel in ‘level four’ tasks: AI drafts, humans review, then AI proceeds1. By October 2025, his briefings were already forecasting 2026 as a year of job-by-job AI transformation5.

Leading Theorists and the Subject of AI Agents

AI agents-autonomous systems that perceive, reason, act, and learn to achieve goals-represent a shift from passive tools to proactive workflows. Nate B Jones builds on foundational work by key theorists:

  • Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig: Pioneers of modern AI, their textbook Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach defines rational agents as entities maximising expected utility in dynamic environments. This underpins Jones’s emphasis on structured autonomy over raw intelligence1,3.
  • Andrew Ng: Dubbed the ‘Godfather of AI,’ Ng popularised agentic workflows at Stanford and through Landing AI. He advocates ‘agentic reasoning,’ where AI chains tools and decisions, aligning with Jones’s production playbooks for enterprises like Walmart2.
  • Yohei Nakajima: Creator of BabyAGI (2023), an early open-source agent framework that demonstrated recursive task decomposition. This inspired Jones’s warnings against hype, stressing expert-designed workflows for complex problems1,4.
  • Anthropic Researchers: Their work on Constitutional AI and agent patterns (e.g., long-running memory) informs Jones’s analyses of scalable agents, as seen in his breakdowns of reliable architectures6.

Jones synthesises these ideas into enterprise strategy, arguing that agents are not future tech but ‘production infrastructure now.’ He counters delays by outlining six principles for quick builds (days or weeks), including context-aware prompts and risk-mitigated deployment2. This positions him as a practitioner-theorist, translating academic foundations into C-suite playbooks amid the 2025-2026 agent revolution.

Broader Implications for Workflows

Jones’s quote underscores a paradigm shift: AI agents amplify top human talent, making them ‘more fingertippy’ rather than replacing them1. Big companies succeed by ‘leaning in’-auditing processes, building observability, and iterating fast-yielding volume at scale. For leaders, the message is clear: harness agents properly, or risk irreversible competitive lag2,3.

References

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obqjIoKaqdM

2. https://natesnewsletter.substack.com/p/executive-briefing-your-2025-ai-agent

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NjtPH8VMAU

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FKxyPAJ2Ok

5. https://natesnewsletter.substack.com/p/2026-sneak-peek-the-first-job-by-9ac

6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNcEgqzlPqs

7. https://www.natebjones.com

"The pleasant surprise is how much you can accomplish when you properly harness your agents, and how big companies are leaning in and able to actually get volume done on that basis." - Quote: Nate B Jones

read more
Term: AI slop

Term: AI slop

“AI slop refers to low-quality, mass-produced digital content (text, images, video, audio, workflows, agents, outputs) generated by artificial intelligence, often with little effort or meaning, designed to pass as social media or pass off cognitive load in the workplace.” – AI slop

AI slop refers to low-quality, mass-produced digital content created using generative artificial intelligence that prioritises speed and volume over substance and quality.1 The term encompasses text, images, video, audio, and workplace outputs designed to exploit attention economics on social media platforms or reduce cognitive load in professional environments through minimal-effort automation.2,3 Coined in the 2020s, AI slop has become synonymous with digital clutter-content that lacks originality, depth, and meaningful insight whilst flooding online spaces with generic, unhelpful material.1

Key Characteristics

AI slop exhibits several defining features that distinguish it from intentionally created content:

  • Vague and generalised information: Content remains surface-level, offering perspectives and insights already widely available without adding novel value or depth.2
  • Repetitive structuring and phrasing: AI-generated material follows predictable patterns-rhythmic structures, uniform sentence lengths, and formulaic organisation that create a distinctly robotic quality.2
  • Lack of original insight: The content regurgitates existing information from training data rather than generating new perspectives, opinions, or analysis that differentiate it from competing material.2
  • Neutral corporate tone: AI slop typically employs bland, impersonal language devoid of distinctive brand voice, personality, or strong viewpoints.2
  • Unearned profundity: Serious narrative transitions and rhetorical devices appear without substantive foundation, creating an illusion of depth.6

Origins and Evolution

The term emerged in the early 2020s as large language models and image diffusion models accelerated the creation of high-volume, low-quality content.1 Early discussions on platforms including 4chan, Hacker News, and YouTube employed “slop” as in-group slang to describe AI-generated material, with alternative terms such as “AI garbage,” “AI pollution,” and “AI-generated dross” proposed by journalists and commentators.1 The 2025 Word of the Year designation by both Merriam-Webster and the American Dialect Society formalised the term’s cultural significance.1

Manifestations Across Contexts

Social Media and Content Creation: Creators exploit attention economics by flooding platforms with low-effort content-clickbait articles with misleading titles, shallow blog posts stuffed with keywords for search engine manipulation, and bizarre imagery designed for engagement rather than authenticity.1,4 Examples range from surreal visual combinations (Jesus made of spaghetti, golden retrievers performing surgery) to manipulative videos created during crises to push particular narratives.1,5

Workplace “Workslop”: A Harvard Business Review study conducted with Stanford University and BetterUp found that 40% of participating employees received AI-generated content that appeared substantive but lacked genuine value, with each incident requiring an average of two hours to resolve.1 This workplace variant demonstrates how AI slop extends beyond public-facing content into professional productivity systems.

Societal Impact

AI slop creates several interconnected problems. It displaces higher-quality material that could provide genuine utility, making it harder for original creators to earn citations and audience attention.2 The homogenised nature of mass-produced AI content-where competitors’ material sounds identical-eliminates differentiation and creates forgettable experiences that fail to connect authentically with audiences.2 Search engines increasingly struggle with content quality degradation, whilst platforms face challenges distinguishing intentional human creativity from synthetic filler.3

Mitigation Strategies

Organisations seeking to avoid creating AI slop should employ several practices: develop extremely specific prompts grounded in detailed brand voice guidelines and examples; structure reusable prompts with clear goals and constraints; and maintain rigorous human oversight for fact-checking and accuracy verification.2 The fundamental antidote remains cultivating specificity rooted in particular knowledge, tangible experience, and distinctive perspective.6

Related Theorist: Jonathan Gilmore

Jonathan Gilmore, a philosophy professor at the City University of New York, has emerged as a key intellectual voice in analysing AI slop’s cultural and epistemological implications. Gilmore characterises AI-generated material as possessing an “incredibly banal, realistic style” that is deceptively easy for viewers to process, masking its fundamental lack of substance.1

Gilmore’s contribution to understanding AI slop extends beyond mere description into philosophical territory. His work examines how AI-generated content exploits cognitive biases-our tendency to accept information that appears professionally formatted and realistic, even when it lacks genuine insight or originality. This observation proves particularly significant in an era where visual and textual authenticity no longer correlates reliably with truthfulness or value.

By framing AI slop through a philosophical lens, Gilmore highlights a deeper cultural problem: the erosion of epistemic standards in digital spaces. His analysis suggests that AI slop represents not merely a technical problem requiring better filters, but a fundamental challenge to how societies evaluate knowledge, authenticity, and meaningful communication. Gilmore’s work encourages critical examination of the systems and incentive structures that reward volume and speed over depth and truth-a perspective essential for understanding why AI slop proliferates despite its obvious deficiencies.

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_slop

2. https://www.seo.com/blog/ai-slop/

3. https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/ai-slop-is-on-the-rise-what-does-it-mean-for-how-we-use-the-internet

4. https://edrm.net/2024/07/the-new-term-slop-joins-spam-in-our-vocabulary/

5. https://www.theringer.com/2025/12/17/pop-culture/ai-slop-meaning-meme-examples-images-word-of-the-year

6. https://www.ignorance.ai/p/the-field-guide-to-ai-slop

"AI slop refers to low-quality, mass-produced digital content (text, images, video, audio, workflows, agents, outputs) generated by artificial intelligence, often with little effort or meaning, designed to pass as social media or pass off cognitive load in the workplace." - Term: AI slop

read more
Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru. Coursera founder

Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru. Coursera founder

“I find that we’ve done this “let a thousand flowers bloom” bottom-up [AI] innovation thing, and for the most part, it’s led to a lot of nice little things but nothing transformative for businesses.” – Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

In a candid reflection at the World Economic Forum 2026 session titled ‘Corporate Ladders, AI Reshuffled,’ Andrew Ng critiques the prevailing ‘let a thousand flowers bloom’ approach to AI innovation. He argues that while this bottom-up strategy has produced numerous incremental tools, it falls short of delivering the profound business transformations required in today’s competitive landscape1,3,4. This perspective emerges from Ng’s deep immersion in AI’s evolution, where he observes a landscape brimming with potential yet hampered by fragmented efforts.

Andrew Ng: The Architect of Modern AI Education and Research

Andrew Ng stands as one of the foremost figures in artificial intelligence, often dubbed an ‘AI guru’ for his pioneering contributions. A British-born computer scientist, Ng co-founded Coursera in 2012, revolutionising online education by making high-quality courses accessible worldwide, with a focus on machine learning and AI1,4. Prior to that, he led the Google Brain project from 2011 to 2012, establishing one of the first large-scale deep learning initiatives that laid foundational work for advancements now powering Google DeepMind1.

Today, Ng heads DeepLearning.AI, offering practical AI training programmes, and serves as managing general partner at AI Fund, investing in transformative AI startups. His career also includes professorships at Stanford University and Baidu’s chief scientist role, where he scaled AI applications in China. At Davos 2026, Ng highlighted Google’s resurgence with Gemini 3 while emphasising the ‘white hot’ AI ecosystem’s opportunities for players like Anthropic and OpenAI1. He consistently advocates for upskilling, noting that ‘a person that uses AI will be so much more productive, they will replace someone that doesn’t,’ countering fears of mass job losses with a vision of augmented human capabilities3.

Context of the Quote: Davos 2026 and the Shift from Experimentation to Enterprise Impact

Delivered in January 2026 during a YouTube live session on how AI is reshaping jobs, skills, careers, and workflows, Ng’s remark underscores a pivotal moment in AI adoption[Source]. Amid Davos discussions, he addressed the tension between hype and reality: bottom-up innovation has yielded ‘nice little things’ like chatbots and coding assistants, but businesses crave systemic overhauls in areas such as travel, retail, and domain-specific automation1. Ng points to underinvestment in the application layer, urging a pivot towards targeted, top-down strategies to unlock transformative value-echoing themes of agentic AI, task automation, and workflow integration[TAGS].

This aligns with his broader Davos narrative, including calls for open-source AI to foster sovereignty (as for India) and pragmatic workforce reskilling, where AI handles 30-40% of tasks, leaving humans to manage the rest2,3. The session, part of WEF’s exploration of AI’s role in corporate structures, signals a maturing field moving beyond foundational models to enterprise-grade deployment.

Leading Theorists on AI Innovation Paradigms: From Bottom-Up Bloom to Structured Transformation

Ng’s critique builds on foundational theories of innovation in AI, drawing from pioneers who shaped the debate between decentralised experimentation and directed progress.

  • Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton (The Godfathers of Deep Learning): These Turing Award winners ignited the deep learning revolution in the 2010s. Their bottom-up approach-exemplified by convolutional neural networks and backpropagation-mirrored Mao Zedong’s ‘let a thousand flowers bloom’ metaphor, encouraging diverse neural architectures. Yet, as Ng notes, this has led to proliferation without proportional business disruption, prompting calls for vertical integration.
  • Jensen Huang (NVIDIA CEO): Huang’s five-layer AI stack-energy, silicon, cloud, foundational models, applications-provides the theoretical backbone for Ng’s views. He emphasises that true transformation demands investment atop the stack, not just base layers, aligning with Ng’s push beyond ‘nice little things’ to workflow automation5.
  • Fei-Fei Li (Stanford Vision Lab): Ng’s collaborator and ‘Godmother of AI,’ Li advocates human-centred AI, stressing application-layer innovations for real-world impact, such as in healthcare imaging-reinforcing the need for focused enterprise adoption.
  • Demis Hassabis (Google DeepMind): From Ng’s Google Brain era, Hassabis champions unified labs for scalable AI, critiquing siloed efforts in favour of top-down orchestration, much like Ng’s prescription for business transformation.

These theorists collectively highlight a consensus: while bottom-up innovation democratised AI tools, the next phase requires deliberate, top-down engineering to embed AI into core business processes, driving productivity and competitive edges.

Implications for Businesses and the AI Ecosystem

Ng’s insight challenges leaders to reassess AI strategies, prioritising agentic systems that automate tasks and elevate human judgement. As the AI landscape heats up-with models like Gemini 3, Llama-4, and Qwen-2-opportunities abound for those bridging the application gap1,2. This perspective not only contextualises current hype but guides towards sustainable, transformative deployment.

References

1. https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/davos-summit/davos-2026-google-s-having-a-moment-but-ai-landscape-is-white-hot-says-andrew-ng-13779205.html

2. https://www.aicerts.ai/news/andrew-ng-open-source-ai-india-call-resonates-at-davos/

3. https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-makers/davos-2026-andrew-ng-says-fears-of-ai-driven-job-losses-are-exaggerated-87874.htm

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ9DTjyfIq8

5. https://globaladvisors.biz/2026/01/23/the-ai-signal-from-the-world-economic-forum-2026-at-davos/

"I find that we've done this "let a thousand flowers bloom" bottom-up [AI] innovation thing, and for the most part, it's led to a lot of nice little things but nothing transformative for businesses." - Quote: Andrew Ng - AI guru. Coursera founder

read more
Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

“My most productive developers are actually not fresh college grads; they have 10, 20 years of experience in coding and are on top of AI… one tier down… is the fresh college grads that really know how to use AI… one tier down from that is the people with 10 years of experience… the least productive that I would never hire are the fresh college grads that… do not know AI.” – Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

In a candid discussion at the World Economic Forum 2026 in Davos, Andrew Ng unveiled a provocative hierarchy of developer productivity, prioritising AI fluency over traditional experience. Delivered during the session ‘Corporate Ladders, AI Reshuffled,’ this perspective challenges conventional hiring norms amid AI’s rapid evolution. Ng’s remarks, captured in a live YouTube panel on 19 January 2026, underscore how artificial intelligence is redefining competence in software engineering.

Andrew Ng: The Architect of Modern AI Education

Andrew Ng stands as one of the foremost pioneers in artificial intelligence, blending academic rigour with entrepreneurial vision. A British-born computer scientist, he earned his PhD from the University of California, Berkeley, and later joined Stanford University, where he co-founded the Stanford AI Lab. Ng’s breakthrough came with his development of one of the first large-scale online courses on machine learning in 2011, which attracted over 100,000 students and laid the groundwork for massive open online courses (MOOCs).

In 2012, alongside Daphne Koller, he co-founded Coursera, transforming global access to education by partnering with top universities to offer courses in AI, data science, and beyond. The platform now serves millions, democratising skills essential for the AI age. Ng also led Baidu’s AI Group as Chief Scientist from 2014 to 2017, scaling deep learning applications at an industrial level. Today, as founder of DeepLearning.AI and managing general partner at AI Fund, he invests in and educates on practical AI deployment. His influence extends to Google Brain, which he co-founded in 2011, pioneering advancements in deep learning that power today’s generative models.

Ng’s Davos appearances, including 2026 interviews with Moneycontrol and others, consistently advocate for AI optimism tempered by pragmatism. He dismisses fears of an AI bubble in applications while cautioning on model training costs, and stresses upskilling: ‘A person that uses AI will be so much more productive, they will replace someone that doesn’t use AI.’1,3

Context of the Quote: AI’s Disruption of Corporate Ladders

The quote emerged from WEF 2026’s exploration of how AI reshuffles organisational hierarchies and talent pipelines. Ng argued that AI tools amplify human capabilities unevenly, creating a new productivity spectrum. Seasoned coders who master AI-such as large language models for code generation-outpace novices, while AI-illiterate veterans lag. This aligns with his broader Davos narrative: AI handles 30-40% of many jobs’ tasks, leaving humans to focus on the rest, but only if they adapt.3

Ng highlighted real-world shifts in Silicon Valley, where AI inference demand surges, throttling teams due to capacity limits. He urged infrastructure build-out and open-source adoption, particularly for nations like India, warning against vendor lock-in: ‘If it’s open, no one can mess with it.’2 Fears of mass job losses? Overhyped, per Ng-layoffs stem more from post-pandemic corrections than automation.3

Leading Theorists on AI, Skills, and Future Work

Ng’s views echo and extend seminal theories on technological unemployment and skill augmentation.

  • David Autor: MIT economist whose ‘skill-biased technological change’ framework (1990s onwards) posits automation displaces routine tasks but boosts demand for non-routine cognitive skills. Ng’s hierarchy mirrors this: AI supercharges experienced workers’ judgement while sidelining routine coders.3
  • Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee: In ‘The Second Machine Age’ (2014), they describe how digital technologies widen productivity gaps, favouring ‘superstars’ who leverage tools. Ng’s top tier-AI-savvy veterans-embodies this ‘winner-takes-more’ dynamic in coding.1
  • Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo: Their ‘task-based’ model (2010s) quantifies automation’s impact: AI automates coding subtasks, but complements human oversight. Ng’s 30-40% task automation estimate directly invokes this, predicting productivity booms for adapters.3
  • Fei-Fei Li: Ng’s Stanford colleague and ‘Godmother of AI Vision,’ she emphasises human-AI collaboration. Her work on multimodal AI reinforces Ng’s call for developers to integrate AI into workflows, not replace manual toil.
  • Yann LeCun, Geoffrey Hinton, and Yoshua Bengio: The ‘Godfathers of Deep Learning’ (Turing Award 2018) enabled tools like those Ng champions. Their foundational neural network advances underpin modern code assistants, validating Ng’s tiers where AI fluency trumps raw experience.

These theorists collectively frame AI as an amplifier, not annihilator, of labour-resonating with Ng’s prescription for careers: master AI or risk obsolescence. As workflows agenticise, coding evolves from syntax drudgery to strategic orchestration.

Implications for Careers and Skills

Ng’s ladder demands immediate action: prioritise AI literacy via platforms like Coursera, fine-tune open models like Llama-4 or Qwen-2, and rebuild talent pipelines around meta-skills like prompt engineering and bias auditing.2,5 For IT powerhouses like India’s $280 billion services sector, upskilling velocity is non-negotiable.6 In this reshuffled landscape, productivity hinges not on years coded, but on AI mastery.

References

1. https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/davos-summit/davos-2026-are-we-in-an-ai-bubble-andrew-ng-says-it-depends-on-where-you-look-13779435.html

2. https://www.aicerts.ai/news/andrew-ng-open-source-ai-india-call-resonates-at-davos/

3. https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-makers/davos-2026-andrew-ng-says-fears-of-ai-driven-job-losses-are-exaggerated-87874.htm

4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ9DTjyfIq8

5. https://globaladvisors.biz/2026/01/23/the-ai-signal-from-the-world-economic-forum-2026-at-davos/

6. https://economictimes.com/tech/artificial-intelligence/india-must-speed-up-ai-upskilling-coursera-cofounder-andrew-ng/articleshow/126703083.cms

"My most productive developers are actually not fresh college grads; they have 10, 20 years of experience in coding and are on top of AI... one tier down... is the fresh college grads that really know how to use AI... one tier down from that is the people with 10 years of experience... the least productive that I would never hire are the fresh college grads that... do not know AI." - Quote: Andrew Ng - AI guru, Coursera founder

read more
Quote: Microsoft

Quote: Microsoft

“DeepSeek’s success reflects growing Chinese momentum across Africa, a trend that may continue to accelerate in 2026.” – Microsoft – January 2026

The quote originates from Microsoft’s Global AI Adoption in 2025 report, published by the company’s AI Economy Institute and detailed in a January 2026 blog post on ‘On the Issues’. It highlights the rapid ascent of DeepSeek, a Chinese open-source AI platform, in African markets. Microsoft notes that DeepSeek’s free access and strategic partnerships have driven adoption rates 2 to 4 times higher in Africa than in other regions, positioning it as a key factor in China’s expanding technological influence.4,5

Backstory on the Source: Microsoft’s Perspective

Microsoft, a global technology leader with deep investments in AI through partnerships like OpenAI, tracks worldwide AI diffusion to inform its strategy. The 2025 report analyses user data across countries, revealing how accessibility shapes adoption. While Microsoft acknowledges its stake in broader AI proliferation, the analysis remains data-driven, emphasising DeepSeek’s role in underserved markets without endorsing geopolitical shifts.1,2,4

DeepSeek holds significant market shares in Africa: 16-20% in Ethiopia, Tunisia, Malawi, Zimbabwe, and Madagascar; 11-14% in Uganda and Niger. This contrasts with low uptake in North America and Europe, where Western models dominate.1,2,3

DeepSeek: The Chinese AI Challenger

Founded in 2023, DeepSeek is a Hangzhou-based startup rivalling OpenAI’s ChatGPT with cost-effective, open-source models under an MIT licence. Its free chatbot eliminates barriers like subscription fees or credit cards, appealing to price-sensitive regions. The January 2025 release of its R1 model, praised in Nature as a ‘landmark paper’ co-authored by founder Liang Wenfeng, demonstrated advanced reasoning for math and coding at lower costs.2,4

Strategic distribution via Huawei phones as default chatbots, plus partnerships and telecom integrations, propelled its growth. Adoption peaks in China (89%), Russia (43%), Belarus (56%), Cuba (49%), Iran (25%), and Syria (23%). Microsoft warns this could serve as a ‘geopolitical instrument’ for Chinese influence where US services face restrictions.2,3,4

Broader Implications for Africa and the Global South

Africa’s AI uptake accelerates via free platforms like DeepSeek, potentially onboarding the ‘next billion users’ from the global South. Factors include Huawei’s infrastructure push and awareness campaigns. However, concerns arise over biases, such as restricted political content aligned with Chinese internet access, and security risks prompting bans in the US, Australia, Germany, and even Microsoft internally.1,2

Leading Theorists on AI Geopolitics and Global Adoption

  • Lavista Ferres (Microsoft AI researcher): Leads the lab behind the report. Observes DeepSeek’s technical strengths but notes political divergences, predicting influence on global discourse.2
  • Liang Wenfeng (DeepSeek founder): Drives open-source innovation, authoring peer-reviewed work on efficient AI models that challenge US dominance.2
  • Walid Kéfi (AI commentator): Analyses Africa’s generative AI surge, crediting free platforms for scaling adoption amid infrastructure challenges.1

These insights underscore a pivotal shift: AI’s future hinges on openness and accessibility, reshaping power dynamics between US and Chinese ecosystems.4

References

1. https://www.ecofinagency.com/news/1301-51867-microsoft-study-maps-africa-s-generative-ai-uptake-as-free-platforms-drive-adoption

2. https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/deepseeks-ai-gains-traction-developing-nations-microsoft-report-129021507

3. https://www.euronews.com/next/2026/01/09/deepseeks-ai-gains-traction-in-developing-nations-microsoft-report-says

4. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/topics/ai-economy-institute/reports/global-ai-adoption-2025/

5. https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2026/01/08/global-ai-adoption-in-2025/

6. https://www.cryptopolitan.com/microsoft-says-china-beating-america-in-ai/

“DeepSeek’s success reflects growing Chinese momentum across Africa, a trend that may continue to accelerate in 2026.” - Quote: Microsoft

read more
Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

“I think one of the challenges is, because AI technology is still evolving rapidly, the skills that are going to be needed in the future are not yet clear today. It depends on lifelong learning.” – Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

Delivered during a session on Corporate Ladders, AI Reshuffled at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2026, this insight from Andrew Ng captures the essence of navigating an era where artificial intelligence advances at breakneck speed. Ng’s words underscore a pivotal shift: as AI reshapes jobs and workflows, the uncertainty of future skills demands a commitment to continuous adaptation1,2.

Andrew Ng: The Architect of Modern AI Education

Andrew Ng stands as one of the foremost figures in artificial intelligence, often dubbed an AI guru for his pioneering contributions to machine learning and online education. A British-born computer scientist, Ng co-founded Coursera in 2012, revolutionising access to higher education by partnering with top universities to offer massive open online courses (MOOCs). His platforms, including DeepLearning.AI and Landing AI, have democratised AI skills, training millions worldwide2,3.

Ng’s career trajectory is marked by landmark roles: he led the Google Brain project, which advanced deep learning at scale, and served as chief scientist at Baidu, applying AI to real-world applications in search and autonomous driving. As managing general partner at AI Fund, he invests in startups bridging AI with practical domains. At Davos 2026, Ng addressed fears of AI-driven job losses, arguing they are overstated. He broke jobs into tasks, noting AI handles only 30-40% currently, boosting productivity for those who adapt: ‘A person that uses AI will be so much more productive, they will replace someone that doesn’t use AI’2,3. His emphasis on coding as a ‘durable skill’-not for becoming engineers, but for building personalised software to automate workflows-aligns directly with the quoted challenge of unclear future skills1.

The Broader Context: AI’s Impact on Jobs and Skills at Davos 2026

The quote emerged amid Davos discussions on agentic AI systems-autonomous agents managing end-to-end workflows-pushing humans towards oversight, judgement, and accountability. Ng highlighted meta-cognitive agility: shifting from perishable technical skills to ‘learning to learn’1. This resonates with global concerns; IMF’s Kristalina Georgieva noted one in ten jobs in advanced economies already need new skills, with labour markets unprepared1. Ng urged upskilling, especially for regions like India, warning its IT services sector risks disruption without rapid AI literacy3,5.

Corporate strategies are evolving: the T-shaped model promotes AI literacy across functions (breadth) paired with irreplaceable domain expertise (depth). Firms rebuild talent ladders, replacing grunt work with AI-supported apprenticeships fostering early decision-making1. Ng’s optimism tempers hype; AI improves incrementally, not in dramatic leaps, yet demands proactive reskilling3.

Leading Theorists Shaping AI, Skills, and Lifelong Learning

Ng’s views build on foundational theorists in AI and labour economics:

  • Geoffrey Hinton, Yann LeCun, and Yoshua Bengio (the ‘Godfathers of AI’): Pioneered deep learning, enabling today’s breakthroughs. Hinton, Ng’s early collaborator at Google Brain, warns of AI risks but affirms its transformative potential for productivity2. Their work underpins Ng’s task-based job analysis.
  • Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee (MIT): In ‘The Second Machine Age’, they theorise how digital technologies complement human skills, amplifying ‘non-routine’ cognitive tasks. This mirrors Ng’s productivity shift, where AI augments rather than replaces1,2.
  • Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael Osborne (Oxford): Their 2013 study quantified automation risks for 702 occupations, sparking debates on reskilling. Ng extends this by focusing on partial automation (30-40%) and lifelong learning imperatives2.
  • Daron Acemoglu (MIT): Critiques automation’s wage-polarising effects, advocating ‘so-so technologies’ that automate mid-skill tasks. Ng counters with optimism for human-AI collaboration via upskilling3.

These theorists converge on a consensus: AI disrupts routines but elevates human judgement, creativity, and adaptability-skills honed through lifelong learning, as Ng advocates.

Ng’s prescience positions this quote as a clarion call for individuals and organisations to embrace uncertainty through perpetual growth in an AI-driven world.

References

1. https://globaladvisors.biz/2026/01/23/the-ai-signal-from-the-world-economic-forum-2026-at-davos/

2. https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-makers/davos-2026-andrew-ng-says-fears-of-ai-driven-job-losses-are-exaggerated-87874.htm

3. https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/davos-summit/davos-2026-ai-is-continuously-improving-despite-perception-that-excitement-has-faded-says-andrew-ng-13780763.html

4. https://www.aicerts.ai/news/andrew-ng-open-source-ai-india-call-resonates-at-davos/

5. https://economictimes.com/tech/artificial-intelligence/india-must-speed-up-ai-upskilling-coursera-cofounder-andrew-ng/articleshow/126703083.cms

"I think one of the challenges is, because AI technology is still evolving rapidly, the skills that are going to be needed in the future are not yet clear today. It depends on lifelong learning." - Quote: Andrew Ng - AI guru. Coursera founder

read more
Quote: Professor Hannah Fry – University of Cambridge

Quote: Professor Hannah Fry – University of Cambridge

“Humans are not very good at exponentials. And right now, at this moment, we are standing right on the bend of the curve. AGI is not a distant thought experiment anymore.” – Professor Hannah Fry – Univeristy of Cambridge

The quote comes at the end of a wide?ranging conversation between applied mathematician and broadcaster Professor Hannah Fry and DeepMind co?founder Shane Legg, recorded for the “Google DeepMind, the podcast” series in late 2025. Fry is reflecting on Legg’s decades?long insistence that artificial general intelligence would arrive much sooner than most experts expected, and on his argument that its impact will be structurally comparable to the Industrial Revolution: a technology that reshapes work, wealth, and the basic organisation of society rather than just adding another digital tool. Her remark that “humans are not very good at exponentials” is a pointed reminder of how easily people misread compounding processes, from pandemics to technological progress, and therefore underestimate how quickly “next decade” scenarios can become “this quarter” realities.?

Context of the quote

Fry’s line follows a discussion in which Legg lays out a stepwise picture of AI progress: from today’s uneven but impressive systems, through “minimal AGI” that can reliably perform the full range of ordinary human cognitive tasks, to “full AGI” capable of the most exceptional creative and scientific feats, and then on to artificial superintelligence that eclipses human capability in most domains. Throughout, Legg stresses that current models already exceed humans in language coverage, encyclopaedic knowledge and some kinds of problem solving, while still failing at basic visual reasoning, continual learning, and robust commonsense. The trajectory he sketches is not a gentle slope but a sharpening curve, driven by scaling laws, data, architectures and hardware; Fry’s “bend of the curve” image captures the moment when such a curve stops looking linear to human intuition and starts to feel suddenly, uncomfortably steep.?

That curve is not just about raw capability but about diffusion into the economy. Legg argues that over the next few years, AI will move from being a helpful assistant to doing a growing share of economically valuable work—starting with software engineering and other high?paid cognitive roles that can be done entirely through a laptop. He anticipates that tasks once requiring a hundred engineers might soon be done by a small team amplified by advanced AI tools, with similarly uneven but profound effects across law, finance, research, and other knowledge professions. By the time Fry delivers her closing reflection, the conversation has moved from technical definitions to questions of social contract: how to design a post?AGI economy, how to distribute the gains from machine intelligence, and how to manage the transition period in which disruption and opportunity coexist.?

Hannah Fry: person and perspective

Hannah Fry is a professor in the mathematics of cities who has built a public career explaining complex systems—epidemics, finance, urban dynamics and now AI—to broad audiences. Her training in applied mathematics and complexity science has made her acutely aware of how exponential processes play out in the real world, from contagion curves during COVID?19 to the compounding effect of small percentage gains in algorithmic performance and hardware efficiency. She has repeatedly highlighted the cognitive bias that leads people to underreact when growth is slow and overreact when it becomes visibly explosive, a theme she explicitly connects in this podcast to the early days of the pandemic, when warnings about exponential infection growth were largely ignored while life carried on as normal.?

In the AGI conversation, Fry positions herself as an interpreter between technical insiders and a lay audience that is already experiencing AI in everyday tools but may not yet grasp the systemic implications. Her remark that the general public may, in some sense, “get it” better than domain specialists echoes Legg’s observation that non?experts sometimes see current systems as already effectively “intelligent,” while many professionals in affected fields downplay the relevance of AI to their own work. When she says “AGI is not a distant thought experiment anymore,” she is distilling Legg’s timelines—his long?standing 50/50 prediction of minimal AGI by 2028, followed by full AGI within a decade—into a single, accessible warning that the window for slow institutional adaptation is closing.?

Meaning of “not very good at exponentials”

The specific phrase “humans are not very good at exponentials” draws on a familiar insight from behavioural economics and cognitive psychology: people routinely misjudge exponential growth, treating it as if it were linear. During the COVID?19 pandemic, this manifested in the gap between early warnings about exponential case growth and the public’s continued attendance at large events right up until visible crisis hit, an analogy Fry explicitly invokes in the episode. In technology, the same bias leads organisations to plan as if next year will look like this year plus a small increment, even when underlying drivers—compute, algorithmic innovation, investment, data availability—are compounding at rates that double capabilities over very short horizons.?

Fry’s “bend of the curve” language marks the point where incremental improvements accumulate to the point that qualitative change becomes hard to ignore: AI systems not only answering questions but autonomously writing production code, conducting literature reviews, proposing experiments, or acting as agents in the world. At that bend, the lag between capability and governance becomes a central concern; Legg emphasises that there will not be enough time for leisurely consensus?building once AGI is fully realised, hence his call for every academic discipline and sector—law, education, medicine, city planning, economics—to begin serious scenario work now. Fry’s closing comment translates that call into a general admonition: exponential technologies demand anticipatory thinking, not reactive crisis management.?

Leading theorists behind the ideas

The intellectual backdrop to Fry’s quote and Legg’s perspectives on AGI blends several strands of work in AI theory, safety and the study of technological revolutions.

  • Shane Legg and Ben Goertzel helped revive and popularise the term “artificial general intelligence” in the early 2000s to distinguish systems aimed at broad, human?like cognitive competence from “narrow AI” optimised for specific tasks. Legg’s own academic work, influenced by his supervisor Marcus Hutter, explores formal definitions of universal intelligence and the conditions under which machine systems could match or exceed human problem?solving across many domains.?

  • I. J. Good introduced the “intelligence explosion” hypothesis in 1965, arguing that a sufficiently advanced machine intelligence capable of improving its own design could trigger a runaway feedback loop of ever?greater capability. This notion of recursive self?improvement underpins much of the contemporary discourse about AI timelines and the risks associated with crossing particular capability thresholds.?

  • Eliezer Yudkowsky developed thought experiments and early arguments about AGI’s existential risks, emphasising that misaligned superintelligence could be catastrophically dangerous even if human developers never intended harm. His writing helped seed the modern AI safety movement and influenced researchers and entrepreneurs who later entered mainstream organisations.?

  • Nick Bostrom synthesised and formalised many of these ideas in “Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies,” providing widely cited scenarios in which AGI rapidly transitions into systems whose goals and optimisation power outstrip human control. Bostrom’s work is central to Legg’s concern with how to steer AGI safely once it surpasses human intelligence, especially around questions of alignment, control and long?term societal impact.?

  • Geoffrey Hinton, Stuart Russell and other AI pioneers have added their own warnings in recent years: Hinton has drawn parallels between AI and other technologies whose potential harms were recognized only after wide deployment, while Russell has argued for a re?founding of AI as the science of beneficial machines explicitly designed to be uncertain about human preferences. Their perspectives reinforce Legg’s view that questions of ethics, interpretability and “System 2 safety”—ensuring that advanced systems can reason transparently about moral trade?offs—are not peripheral but central to responsible AGI development.?

Together, these theorists frame AGI as both a continuation of a long scientific project to build thinking machines and as a discontinuity in human history whose effects will compound faster than our default intuitions allow. In that context, Fry’s quote reads less as a rhetorical flourish and more as a condensed thesis: exponential dynamics in intelligence technologies are colliding with human cognitive biases and institutional inertia, and the moment to treat AGI as a practical, near?term design problem rather than a speculative future is now.?

References

https://eeg.cl.cam.ac.uk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shane_Legg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMUdrUP-QCs
https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/artificial-general-intelligence
https://kingy.ai/blog/exploring-the-concept-of-artificial-general-intelligence-agi/
https://jetpress.org/v25.2/goertzel.pdf
https://www.dce.va/content/dam/dce/resources/en/digital-cultures/Encountering-AI—Ethical-and-Anthropological-Investigations.pdf
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.08476.pdf
https://hermathsstory.eu/author/admin/page/7/
https://www.shunryugarvey.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/YISR_I_46_1-2_TEXT_P-1.pdf
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/37368915/Nina%20Begus%20Dissertation%20DAC.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
https://www.facebook.com/groups/lifeboatfoundation/posts/10162407288283455/
https://globaldashboard.org/economics-and-development/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gilpress/2024/03/29/artificial-general-intelligence-or-agi-a-very-short-history/
https://ebe.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/content_migration/ebe_uct_ac_za/169/files/WEB%2520UCT%2520CHEM%2520D023%2520Centenary%2520Design.pdf

 

"Humans are not very good at exponentials. And right now, at this moment, we are standing right on the bend of the curve. AGI is not a distant thought experiment anymore." - Quote: Professor Hannah Fry

read more
Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

Quote: Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

“There’s one skill that is already emerging… it’s time to get everyone to learn to code…. not just the software engineers, but the marketers, HR professionals, financial analysts, and so on – the ones that know how to code are much more productive than the ones that don’t, and that gap is growing.” – Andrew Ng – AI guru, Coursera founder

In a forward-looking discussion at the World Economic Forum’s 2026 session on ‘Corporate Ladders, AI Reshuffled’, Andrew Ng passionately advocates for coding as the pivotal skill defining productivity in the AI era. Delivered in January 2026, this insight underscores how AI tools are democratising coding, enabling professionals beyond software engineering to harness technology for greater efficiency1. Ng’s message aligns with his longstanding mission to make advanced technology accessible through education and practical application.

Who is Andrew Ng?

Andrew Ng stands as one of the foremost figures in artificial intelligence, renowned for bridging academia, industry, and education. A British-born computer scientist, he earned his PhD from the University of California, Berkeley, and has held prestigious roles including adjunct professor at Stanford University. Ng co-founded Coursera in 2012, revolutionising online learning by offering courses to millions worldwide, including his seminal ‘Machine Learning’ course that has educated over 4 million learners. He led Google Brain, Google’s deep learning research project, from 2011 to 2014, pioneering applications that advanced AI capabilities across industries. Currently, as founder of Landing AI and DeepLearning.AI, Ng focuses on enterprise AI solutions and accessible education platforms. His influence extends to executive positions at Baidu and as a venture capitalist investing in AI startups1,2.

Context of the Quote

The quote emerges from Ng’s reflections on AI’s transformative impact on workflows, particularly at the WEF 2026 event addressing how AI reshuffles corporate structures. Here, Ng highlights ‘vibe coding’-AI-assisted coding that lowers barriers, allowing non-engineers like marketers, HR professionals, and financial analysts to prototype ideas rapidly without traditional hand-coding. He argues this boosts productivity and creativity, warning that the divide between coders and non-coders will widen. Recent talks, such as at Snowflake’s Build conference, reinforce this: ‘The bar to coding is now lower than it ever has been. People that code… will really get more done’1. Ng critiques academia for lagging behind, noting unemployment among computer science graduates due to outdated curricula ignoring AI tools, and stresses industry demand for AI-savvy talent1,2.

Leading Theorists and the Broader Field

Ng’s advocacy builds on foundational AI theories while addressing practical upskilling. Pioneers like Geoffrey Hinton, often called the ‘Godfather of Deep Learning’, laid groundwork through backpropagation and neural networks, influencing Ng’s Google Brain work. Hinton, Ng’s former advisor at Stanford, warns of AI’s job displacement risks but endorses human-AI collaboration. Yann LeCun, Meta’s Chief AI Scientist, complements this with convolutional neural networks essential for computer vision, emphasising open-source AI for broad adoption. Fei-Fei Li, ‘Godmother of AI’, advanced image recognition and co-directs Stanford’s Human-Centered AI Institute, aligning with Ng’s educational focus.

In skills discourse, World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2025 projects technological skills, led by AI and big data, as fastest-growing in importance through 2030, alongside lifelong learning3. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella echoes: ‘AI won’t replace developers, but developers who use AI will replace those who don’t’3. Nvidia’s Jensen Huang and Klarna’s Sebastian Siemiatkowski advocate AI agents and tools like Cursor, predicting hybrid human-AI teams1. Ng’s tips-take AI courses, build systems hands-on, read papers-address a talent crunch where 51% of tech leaders struggle to find AI skills2.

Implications for Careers and Workflows

  • AI-Assisted Coding: Tools like GitHub Copilot, Cursor, and Replit enable ‘agentic development’, delegating routine tasks to AI while humans focus on creativity1,3.
  • Universal Upskilling: Ng urges structured learning via platforms like Coursera, followed by practice, as theory alone insufficient-like studying aeroplanes without flying2.
  • Industry Shifts: Companies like Visa and DoorDash now require AI code generator experience; polyglot programming (Python, Rust) and prompt engineering rise1,3.
  • Warnings: Despite optimism, experts like Stuart Russell caution AI could disrupt 80% of jobs, underscoring adaptive skills2.

Ng’s vision positions coding not as a technical niche but a universal lever for productivity in an AI-driven world, urging immediate action to close the growing gap.

References

1. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/google-brain-founder-andrew-ng-on-why-it-is-still-important-to-learn-coding/articleshow/125247598.cms

2. https://www.finalroundai.com/blog/andrew-ng-ai-tips-2026

3. https://content.techgig.com/career-advice/top-10-developer-skills-to-learn-in-2026/articleshow/125129604.cms

4. https://www.coursera.org/in/articles/ai-skills

5. https://www.idnfinancials.com/news/58779/ai-expert-andrew-ng-programmers-are-still-needed-in-a-different-way

"There's one skill that is already emerging... it's time to get everyone to learn to code.... not just the software engineers, but the marketers, HR professionals, financial analysts, and so on - the ones that know how to code are much more productive than the ones that don't, and that gap is growing." - Quote: Andrew Ng - AI guru, Coursera founder

read more

Download brochure

Introduction brochure

What we do, case studies and profiles of some of our amazing team.

Download

Our latest podcasts on Spotify

Sign up for our newsletters - free

Global Advisors | Quantified Strategy Consulting