“What are you up to with AI?” I’ve been asking that question a lot lately, and most responses focus on use cases, productivity gains, which tools to prioritise and, of course, AI governance. All are valid and important conversations BUT perhaps you need to be having a different conversation. Many organisations are treating AI itself
I recently asked myself: “Am I surprised at the completely different speeds AI is being adopted today?” And my answer did not come easily. I landed on “No”. For context, I was not surprised a year ago about the different speeds. However, as of today I continue to come across organisations that are not adopting
Can the humans in the loop be trusted? How often are you hearing lately “We’ll always keep a human in the loop”? This is recognition that AI can’t be blindly trusted, even when it is a narrow use case, as your AI model can still change if the operating environment changes. But can we trust
While many of the risks associated with AI are now better understood, some organisations continue to experience undesirable outcomes with their integration. Take this little doozy involving Microsoft 365’s Copilot, which resulted in widespread breach of users’ privacy protections. Which brings me to ask, ‘How are you assessing the risk associated with the implementation of
The hardest choices are often the ones where the options are not clearly better or worse than each other. American philosopher Ruth Chang calls these choices “on par”. Her point is not that logic goes out the window. It is that even after you have done the analysis, there can still be a judgment call