The Productivity Paradox

In the IT world, there is what is called the Productivity Paradox. That while investment and development of information technologies continuous, there is little if not less productivity in the markets. Many have tried to answer how can this be. Though there have not been a set explanation, there have been many proposed answers.

One of these answers is measurement quality. The service industry is the one most affected by IT development. Currently the method of productivity measurement can lead to anomalies which may serve to explain the contradiction between technology and productivity. However, trends in the service industry would contradict these claims and it is suspect how the whether the qualities of the sector would actually be relevant in this assessment. 

In addition there are lags. Quite simply, IT takes time to pay for itself. This kind of technology typically has a learning curve that gives the appearance of inefficiency due to the benefits being indirect and long-term. The market has a tendency to be averse to short-term loses, providing the perception.

Another explanation is redistribution. IT implementation may allow for a firm to gain a bigger market value share, but does not increase the total market value. Information gathering is typically only useful for individual companies, however it rarely changes the value output. The value gained from research and analysis is intangible as far as the economy is concerned. However a counter point would be that this does not explain why companies that do not invest on IT lose sales to companies that do.

An a fourth explanation is that it is not information technologies that are the issue but instead the managers. That because technology is evolving so quickly, management principles have not have had the time to catch up on what might be the best way to implement and systematize the tools available. Regardless of these inefficiencies, managers in general seem to still perceive a benefit from their investment in IT.

Regardless of whatever explanation claims people have made, it is imperative to remember that measuring productivity is not a refined process. There are still many questions when it comes to how IT truly benefits firms and the greater economy. However, as both research and technology continue to evolve, our relationship with our tools will continue to change as well.

http://ccs.mit.edu/papers/CCSWP130/ccswp130.html

AI: ¿RETROCESO O QUIEBRA?

      La I.A. siempre ha sido una industria basada en la novedad. la promesa de ChatGPT en su página web siempre ha sido algo parecido a "encuentra inspiración creativa, aprende algo nuevo". Sin embargo, cuando se trata de los detalles, siempre ha sido famosamente inadecuada en lo que se refiere a los detalles, (busque A.I. manos si quiere una prueba rápida), Económicamente, A.I. ha tratado de empujarse a sí misma en tantos mercados como sea posible, principalmente cuando se trata de esfuerzos creativos como la ilustración y la escritura. Naturalmente, la gente ha intentado crear empresas relacionadas con la I.A. y el alquiler de su tecnología. Sin embargo, con el paso del tiempo, y a medida que la novedad de la tecnología se ha ido desvaneciendo, hasta qué punto es realmente viable abrir una empresa centrada en la Inteligencia Artificial. 

    El mercado ha sido duro para todos. Según la Oficina de Estadísticas Laborales, el índice de precios al consumo ha aumentado un 0.55%. 100 dólares en enero de 2000 valen lo mismo que 185,03 dólares en marzo de 2024. Empresas como Stability A.I. o Anthropic han tenido problemas para cubrir la diferencia entre sus gastos y sus beneficios. Los grandes nombres del sector, ChatGPT o productos similares, no han logrado encontrar una estrategia viable para recaudar fondos que les permitan compensar los costes de desarrollo de sus tecnologías. Sencillamente, la tecnología es más cara que los métodos que ya se utilizan. Incluso grandes empresas tecnológicas como Google o Meta (antes conocida como Facebook) han tenido dificultades para hacer que estas tecnologías funcionen.

    Además, la regulación de la inteligencia artificial está aumentando en todo el mundo. Siempre lleva tiempo que la ley se ponga al día con el progreso, y hemos llegado a ese punto. En la Unión Europea, desde el año pasado se han puesto en marcha normativas para proteger y controlar el mercado de la inteligencia artificial. La ley del Parlamento restringe la bio-métrica, la lectura emocional y la policía predictiva. Hay excepciones para casos extremos y emergencias, pero por lo demás la Inteligencia Artificial parece ser algo que no debe utilizarse libremente en la Unión. Además, se han establecido requisitos y medidas de transparencia obligatorios para cualquier empresa que quiera entrar en este campo. Aunque Estados Unidos ha permitido un mercado relativamente libre para la Inteligencia Artificial a nivel nacional, ha presionado en la asamblea de la ONU para aumentar la regulación global de la Inteligencia Artificial, lo que puede ser indicativo de una agenda a largo plazo. En definitiva, parece que cada vez será más difícil entrar en este campo. 

   En definitiva, hoy en día es difícil dedicarse a la inteligencia artificial. Es fácil ver el marketing y la notoriedad de empresas como OpenAI, sin embargo, si vas a entrar en la industria es importante saber lo que está sucediendo dentro de ella. La I.A. va a cambiar el mundo, pero cuanto más cambien las cosas más permanecerán igual. La razón por la que se evalúan estos hechos es para que uno pueda tomar la mejor decisión sobre en qué invertir o qué convertir en su medio de vida. La inteligencia artificial está aquí para quedarse, así que tenemos que aprender tanto cómo cambiará el mundo como cómo no lo hará.  

Fuentes

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/29/technology/ai-startups-financial-reality.html?login=google&auth=login-google

https://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm

https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=100.00&year1=200001&year2=202403

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240308IPR19015/artificial-intelligence-act-meps-adopt-landmark-law

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-14/us-pushes-for-global-ai-rules-at-un-as-regulations-lag-behind 

CONTACT US/LLÁMANOS:

www.200gfs.com/

info@200gfs.com

WhatsApp: +1 (954) 261-2280 or Telegram

For English communications: workacc200gfs@gmail.com

For Spanish communications: info@200gfs.com

 

AI: SET-BACK OR BUST?

     A.I. has always been an industry based on novelty. the promise of ChatGPT on its website has always been something along the lines of "find creative inspiration, learn something new." However, when it comes to the details, it has always been famously inadequate when it comes to details, (look-up A.I. hands if you want quick prove), Economically, A.I. has tried to push itself into as many markets as possible, primarily when it comes to creative endeavors such as illustration and writing. Naturally people have tried to begin enterprises relating to A.I. and the renting of their technology. However, as time has gone on, and as the novelty of the technology has faded, how viable is it really to open an A.I. centered firm.

    The market has been tough on everyone. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the consumer price index has index has increased by 0.55 %. $100 dollars in the January of 2000 will get you the same as $185.03 in the March of 2024. This has naturally has affected the A.I. Business such as Stability A.I. or Anthropic have struggled to meet the gap between their expenses and their profits. The big names in the industry, ChatGPT or similar products, have failed to find a viable strategy to raise funds so that they make-up for the costs in developing their technologies. Quite simply, the technology is just more expensive than methods already in use. Even big tech companies like Google or Meta (previously known as Facebook) have struggled to make these technologies work. 

    In addition, all around the world A.I. regulation is on the rise. It always takes time for law to catch-up with progress, and we have reached that point. In the European Union, since last year regulations have been put in place to protect and control the A.I. market. Bio-metrics, emotional reading, and predictive policing have all been restricted under the Parliament's law. There are exceptions made for edge cases and emergencies, but otherwise A.I. seems to be something to not be liberally used in the Union. In addition, transparency requirements and measures have been made obligatory for any company seeking to enter the field. The US has also made moves to push towards more regulation when it comes to A.I. Even as the USA has allowed for a relatively free market for A.I. domestically, it has made pushes in the UN assembly to increase global regulation for A.I., which may be indicative of a long term agenda. All in all, it seems it will only become more and more difficult to enter the field. 

   Ultimately, it has become difficult to be in A.I. these days. It is easy to see the marketing and notability of companies like OpenAI, however if you are going into the industry it is important to know what is happening within it. A.I. is going to change the world, but the more things changes the more they will stay the same. The reason why these facts are assessed is so that one can make the best decision on what to invest in or what to make into your livelihood. A.I. is here to stay, so we need to learn both how it will change the world, and how it will not.  

Sources

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/29/technology/ai-startups-financial-reality.html?login=google&auth=login-google

https://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm

https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=100.00&year1=200001&year2=202403

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240308IPR19015/artificial-intelligence-act-meps-adopt-landmark-law

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-14/us-pushes-for-global-ai-rules-at-un-as-regulations-lag-behind 

CONTACT US/LLÁMANOS:

www.200gfs.com/

info@200gfs.com

WhatsApp: +1 (954) 261-2280 or Telegram

For English communications: workacc200gfs@gmail.com

For Spanish communications: info@200gfs.com

 

THE DIGITAL FACE STEALERS/ LOS LADRONES DE CARAS DIGITALES

We live in a strange era. For most of history, people have had a sense of logic to the world; a logic something that could be used to determined the absurd from the realistic. In modernity, specially in these past years, it has felt like this logic has abandon us to the point that the things we would have previously laughed about, are now urgently real. Shifts and threats that would be restricted to tall tales or novels becoming reality in ways that are disruptive and sometimes actively malicious. So lets talk about "deepfakes".

AI, that is something you don't seem to be able to avoid talk thereof these days. AI will replace artists, AI will replace authors, those are some of the common talking points. But AI will replace, "you"? Deepfake technology is a collective term used to describe software that is able to replicate the likeness and even the voice of a person to such an extent that people may confuse it for the reality. People like Tom Hanks, leading actor for movies such as Forest Gump or Saving Private Ryan, has had to deal with digital imitators. An AI clone had been used in Instagram advertisements against the consent of Hanks, leading the actor to release a statement clarifying what was happening. On a concerning note, many technology companies have pitched the concepts of AI clones as a solution to the problem of having to treat human beings as people. Naturally, this has been a point of contention in the SAG-AFTRA strike, between actors, writers, and the producers.

So we live in a sci-fi movie, what now? One of the things to keep in mind is that AI, by the nature of it being code, can only make things through a series of average values derived from calculus expressions. As such, AI can never have an "understanding" of the task it has been assigned to do. Once it has to go outside the box it was design for, if it can even, the AI has no capacity to adapt or innovate, only copy what it was trained on. It is not a dynamic system that can create its own ideas, instead it is best to think of it as part of the same family of programs such as auto-complete or Instagram filters. As the novelty of the technology fades, people will become urgently aware of its limits. One of the things AI will probably replace are jobs that employers did not see the value thereof in the first place. It will most likely be used by people who want to spend the least amount of money on the particular activity they are employing the AI for. What this means is that whether AI will replace humanity in the workplace is not a question of competency or efficiency, but instead whether the forces that be valued humanity in the first place.

So, what do you think? we would like to hear your opinions about AI and its place in the future, both in the arts and in business. Do you think AI will be here to stay or is it just a passing trend? How have you interacted with AI? Are you concerned that it will be used to harm people or are you excited about what possibilities may open up.

MERCADO CRYPTO EN FUEGO, EL FUTURO DE BLOCKCHAIN TECNOLOGÍA ES INSEGURO

 Muchos todavía recuerdan el boom de las criptomonedas de 2021. Parecía que la forma de hacer negocios iba a revolucionarse. Empresas como Bored Ape Yacht Club fueron pioneras en el mercado NFT, Bitcoin se estaba generalizando y FTX, un mercado de criptomonedas, estaba en auge. Parecía que el blockchain iba a ser el motor del progreso durante las próximas décadas. Y como la mayoría de los sueños de una revolución completa y radical, la realidad fue totalmente diferente.

Sam Bankman-Fried, ex director ejecutivo de FTX, la empresa de criptomonedas actualmente en quiebra, está ahora siendo juzgado. Los delitos: fraude electrónico, fraude de valores, fraude de materias primas y blanqueo de dinero. Bankman había tomado dinero de las cuentas de los clientes para utilizarlo en inversiones personales y contribuciones políticas. Incluso existe la posibilidad de otro juicio para abordar la naturaleza política de la acusación. Cómo funcionó esto es a través de Alameda Research, un fondo de cobertura propiedad de Bankman. Al fondo se le permitió pedir prestado una cantidad ilimitada de fondos de FTX. Bankman ha afirmado su inocencia y ha achacado esto a la incompetencia de las personas que lo rodean por ser descuidadas con su seguridad. Sus colaboradores más cercanos ya han confesado su participación en el plan.

Más que otros, la industria de la criptografía se ha asociado con un flagrante desprecio por la ley o la regulación. Muchos ven esta prueba como una forma de sentar un precedente en la industria. En este punto de vista hay que señalar dos cosas: que la estafa de Friedman le costó a la industria 8 mil millones de dólares, provocando un efecto dominó que arrasó con los medios de vida de las personas que invirtieron en empresas de criptomonedas o que eran propietarias de ellas; y que Friedman había rescatado previamente a muchas personas en la industria cuando el mercado colapsó en 2022 al aumentar las evaluaciones de criptomonedas.

Les cuento esta historia hoy porque este es un aspecto de la inversión en el que mucha gente no piensa. Cuando se trata de nuevas tecnologías, debido a la falta de conocimientos sobre STEM o de experiencia financiera, la gente cree rápidamente en las promesas de los directores ejecutivos sobre cómo cambiarán el mundo. Además, en esta era moderna, hemos llegado a asociar el progreso con el avance tecnológico con fines económicos. Son sinónimos a estas alturas. Como tal, es fácil aceptar la exageración de tales figuras y organizaciones, como una forma de obtener parte de la gloria que han obtenido. Sin embargo, es muy importante tratar siempre de ver las cosas, no como desearías verlas, sino tal como son. La gente había estado diciendo que el mercado de las criptomonedas era un lugar corrupto y despiadado durante años, y aún así la gente seguía comprando. Ahora, muchas personas normales, incluso antes de este incidente, lo han perdido todo porque creen en una mentira difundida por estas personas. No debemos dejarnos cegar por las luces brillantes de tales cosas o de lo contrario podríamos descubrir que lo que pensábamos que era una luz guía era el señuelo de un pescador.

¿Qué opinas del caso Sam Bankman-Fried? Nos encantaría escuchar sus comentarios a continuación. Como siempre, puede comunicarse con 200GFS si desea realizar una consulta y le deseamos lo mejor.

-200GFS

CONTÁCTANOS/LLÁMANOS:

www.200gfs.com/

info@200gfs.com

WhatsApp: +1 (954) 261-2280 o Telegrama

Para comunicaciones en inglés: workacc200gfs@gmail.com

Para comunicaciones en español: info@200gfs.com

Works Cited

Griffith, E. (2023, October 2). Who’s rooting hardest for a Sam Bankman-fried conviction? the crypto industry. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/02/technology/crypto-insiders-sam-bankman-fried-conviction.html

Yaffe-bellany, D. (2023, October 3). What to know about Sam Bankman-fried’s fraud trial. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/03/business/sam-bankman-fried-trial-ftx.html

CRYPTO MARKET ON FIRE, THE FUTURE OF BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY IS UNSURE/ MERCADO CRYPTO EN FUEGO, EL FUTURO DE BLOCKCHAIN TECNOLOGÍA ES INSEGURO

Many still remember the crypto boom of 2021. It seemed like the way to do business would be revolutionized. Companies such as Bored Ape Yacht Club were pioneers in the NFT market, Bitcoin was becoming mainstream, and FTX, a cryptocurrency marketplace, was booming. It felt like the blockchain was going to be engine of progress for the following decades. And like most dreams of complete and radical revolution, the reality was starkly different.

Sam Bankman-Fried, once CEO of FTX, the currently bankrupted cryptocurrency company, is now on trial. The crimes: wire fraud, securities fraud, commodities fraud and money laundering. Bankman had taken money from customer accounts to use in personal investments and political contributions. There is even the possibility of another trial to address the political nature of the indictment. How this worked is through Alameda Research, a hedge fund that was owned by Bankman. The fund was allowed to borrow an uncapped amount of funds from FTX. Bankman has claimed innocence and has blamed this on the incompetence of the people around him for being careless with their security. His close associates have already confessed to their involvement in the scheme.

More than others, the crypto industry has been associated with a flagrant disregard for the law or regulation. This trial is seen by many as a way to set a precedent in the industry. Two things should be noted on this view: that Friedman's con cost the industry $8 billion, causing a domino effect that obliterated the livelihoods of people who either invested in or owned cryptocurrency firms; and that Friedman had previously bailed out many people in the industry before when the market crashed in 2022 by driving up cryptocurrency evaluations. 

I am bringing this story up today because this is an aspect of investment a lot of people don't think about. When it comes to new technologies, due to a lack of either STEM literacy or financial experience, people are quick to believe in the CEO's promising how they will change the world. In addition, in this modern age, we have come to associate progress with technological advancement for economic purposes. They are synonyms by this point. As such, it is easy to buy into the hype of such figures and organizations, as a way to have some of the glory they have garnered for themselves. However, it is so very important to always try to see things, not as what you wish you would be seeing, but instead for what they are. People had been saying that the crypto market was a corrupt and cutthroat place for years, and yet people still bought in. Now many normal people, even before this incident, have lost everything because they believe a lie peddled by these people. We must not be blinded by the shining lights of such things or otherwise we might find that what we thought was a guiding light was an angler's lure.

So what do you think of the Sam Bankman-Fried case? We would love to hear your comments below. As per always you may contact 200GFS if you wish to make a consult, and we wish you the best.

-200GFS