What the Drama at OpenAI Means for Your Generative A.I. Strategy | How Sam Altman and OpenAI's Leadership Shakeup Sparked a Wave of Panic at Startups | DeSantis v Newsom: the presidential match-up that isn’t | Many small islands have no room for manoeuvre at COP28

View online | Unsubscribe (one-click). For inquiries/unsubscribe issues, Contact Us

� � � � � � You Might Like � � � � � � � � � What the Drama at OpenAI Means for Your Generative A.I. Strategy - Inc.com    Exclusive: The Ample Hills Co-Founders Have Been Let Go--Less Than 6 Months After They Returned to the Company Approaching the first anniversary of the spectacular launch of the artificial intelligence powerhouse ChatGPT, OpenAI seemed invincible. Now, about two million developers have built on their API and Open's chatbot attracts 100 million weekly active users. But the past few days have cast serious doubt about OpenAI's stability--and even its viability.   I have talked to numerous startups that rely on the company's platform. While they admire the amazing innovation, they are still concerned.  Continued here How Sam Altman and OpenAI's Leadership Shakeup Sparked a Wave of Panic at Startups - Inc.com    Exclusive: The Ample Hills Co-Founders Have Been Let Go--Less Than 6 Months After They Returned to the Company Sam Altman may be on his way back to OpenAI after a recent board upheaval and ouster, but startups using the company's technology are seizing the moment of uncertainty to diversify--even if it hurts. As the OpenAI drama unfolded this week, Phil Calçado needed to temper the anxieties of investors for his New York City-based startup, Outropy, which makes an A.I. assistant for engineering managers and executives. Two days after Altman's dismissal on November 17, Calçado sent "an emergency investor update" to his financiers "just to calm everybody down," he explains.  Continued here Don't like ads? Go ad-free with TradeBriefs Premium DeSantis v Newsom: the presidential match-up that isn't - The Economist    PICTURE IT: two of America’s most powerful governors take the debate stage. One is sporting copious amounts of hair gel. The other may, or may not, be wearing lifted boots to appear taller. Gavin Newsom, the Democratic governor of California, and Ron DeSantis, his Republican counterpart in Florida, spend 90 minutes trying to convince viewers that their own state represents the very best of America, and that their relative youth and respective flavour of crusading politics are just what the country needs. Donald Trump is heckling both men in ALL CAPS on Truth Social, from his armchair at Mar-a-Lago, having decided not to seek a second term. Joe Biden is looking forward to retirement, secure in the belief that his presidency was a bridge to the next generation. Sean Hannity, of Fox News, does a passable impression of a neutral moderator. In another universe this could have been a prime-time debate during the 2024 presidential campaign. Instead, Messrs DeSantis and Newsom will face off on Fox News on November 30th for reasons unclear even to the governors themselves. During an interview last month in Los Angeles, your correspondent asked Mr Newsom why Americans should watch a debate between one (floundering) presidential candidate, and a governor who is not (currently) running for anything. “I don’t know they should,” he replied merrily. Yet governors are not the provincial personalities they used to be. “The governor has long been an underappreciated centre of power in US politics,” says Kristoffer Shields of the Eagleton Centre on the American Governor at Rutgers University. “But that changed a little bit during covid.” In the early days of the pandemic Americans watched their governors deliver regular, often daily, press conferences about the advance of the virus. They became household names. The most outspoken inspired admiration and ire from Americans outside their own states. Continued here Many small islands have no room for manoeuvre at COP28 - The Economist    AT THE LATEST climate summit convened by the UN, COP28, which opens in Dubai on November 30th, one group is sure to have an outsize voice. These are the small island developing states (SIDS). Their club numbers just 39 full members and 18 associates. Together they account for less than 1% of the world’s population, land mass and GDP—and just 0.2% of carbon emissions. Yet on climate, as well as in other development-related areas, they have a knack of helping to shape the international agenda. The SIDS vary widely (see maps). Belize, Guyana and Suriname are not even islands. Far from counting as developing, Singapore is one of the world’s richest societies. Many of the others are not exceptionally poor—only seven count among the world’s least developed countries (among them Guinea-Bissau, Haiti and Timor-Leste). But as Emily Wilkinson of the Overseas Development Institute, a think-tank in London, emphasises, SIDS “collectively have much more in common than their very big differences.” The commonalities relate, above all, to the susceptibility that small size confers to sudden shocks. Whether from pandemics or from natural disasters, these have enormous economic and social consequences. A changing climate finds extra ways to pile on the pressure. All this means that small island states are forced to plan for the long run. So when it comes to policy in areas such as climate and development, they are adept at bringing bigger countries—all too slowly, admittedly—along with them. Continued here

You are receiving this mailer as a TradeBriefs subscriber. We fight fake/biased news through human curation & independent editorials. Your support of ads like these makes it possible. Alternatively, get TradeBriefs Premium (ad-free) for only $2/month If you still wish to unsubscribe, you can unsubscribe from all our emails here Our address is 309 Town Center 1, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai 400059 - 433006120