jueves, 22 de septiembre de 2016

How to be a leader in the digital age


How can leaders benefit from digital disruption and breakthrough technologies? Image: REUTERS/Kacper Pempeght companions.

The coming years will be a time of “Digital Leaders”.

Around the world, leaders in different fields have already started to embrace the digital revolution and recognize the power of game-changing technology.

“Every country needs a Minister of the Future,” said Saleforce’s founder and CEO Marc Benioff, at the World Economic Forum in Davos this year. And he was right.

1. But what does leadership actually mean?

There is a plethora of literature on leadership, but only some of it addresses an issue of how disruptive technologies can define the new wave of leaders in today’s world.

Before we move on to digital leadership, we should take a step back and look at what leadership means in general and whether universal characteristics of leadership apply to the fast-changing world of disruptive technologies.

Different ages require different kinds of leadership, but many leading theorists claim that there are certain universal characteristics that are timeless.

First, personal charisma. A charismatic person possesses a rare gift that allows them to influence followers while inspiring loyalty and obedience.

However, Max Weber predicted a decline in charismatic leadership in what he described as “routinization”

Arguably he was right, especially in the Western World where charismatic leadership over the years has been, to some extent, “succeeded by a bureaucracy controlled by a rationally established authority or by a combination of traditional and bureaucratic authority”.

This process is evident in the European Union’s bureaucratic system, where politicians are often accused of being unable to take brave and visionary decisions.

A huge system of checks and balances and the competing national interests of 28 member states makes it harder for high-ranked officials to act decisively.

Even those who possess natural charisma are not able to pursue their right course of action because they are forced to balance various interests, maintain order and seek consensus.

Margaret Thatcher once described European leaders as being “weak” and “feeble”; the same, unfortunately, could be said about a number of leaders in Europe today. It is because their personal charisma, if they ever had it, has been silenced by bureaucracy.

Second, aside from ‘inner’ or personal levels of leadership, there is also an ‘outer’ or behavioral level which relates to how leaders deliver results, according to more integrated psychological theory. There are several universal skills that are worth mentioning, such as: (1) motivational skills; (2) team building; (3) emotional intelligence.

Obviously, this list of skills is not exhausted but indicates the core abilities required to deliver successful results.

And although these ‘outer’ characteristics have largely remained the same, there are also a few which have changed substantially due to the unprecedented impact of technology.

The human impact of technology

We live in a world of rapidly advancing technology which is influencing lives like never before.

Digital technology is transforming politics, businesses, economies and society, as well as our day-to-day lives.

Digital technology has not only broken down the old, familiar models of organizations, but has also created a broad set of new challenges.

The best example of transformative change is probably within the space industry.

In 2015, we could observe how SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket landed safely at Cape Canaveral, which was hailed almost immediately as another giant leap for mankind.

Reusable rockets are a fantastic business opportunity, a source of entertainment and, more importantly, another step forward in the commercialization of space travel and ultimately toward a possible colonization of other planets.

Back here on earth, we can’t deny that our world is changing as never before.

Technological revolution is evident and examples of our new reality abound.

The most popular social media creates no content (Facebook), the fastest growing banks have no actual money (SocietyOne), the world’s largest taxi company owns no taxis (Uber), and the largest accommodation provider owns no real estate (Airbnb).

Today’s game changers drive with completely different fuel and sometimes – as the above examples clearly indicate – they revolutionize even the most basic characteristics of particular industries.

On a conceptual level, the Digital Age - called sometimes the knowledge society or networked society - is marked by several key structural changes that are reshaping leadership: (1) rapid and far-reaching technological changes, (2) globalization leading to the dynamic spread of information; (3) a shift from physical attributes toward knowledge and (4) more dispersed, less hierarchical organizational forms of organization.

The impact of the Digital Age on leadership

Traditional skills have not been supplanted but they now co-exist with a mix of new factors.

First of all, digital leadership can be defined by a leader’s contribution to the transition toward a knowledge society and their knowledge of technology.

Digital leaders have an obligation to keep up with the ongoing global revolution.

They must understand technology, not merely as an enabler but also for its revolutionary force.

Leadership must be driven by an attitude of openness and a genuine hunger for knowledge.

Of course, no rule dictates that leaders must be literate in coding or that they graduated from machine-learning but yes, there is an imperative to understand the impact of breakthrough technologies.

Today’s leaders must have the ability to identify technological trends across different sectors, such as big data, cloud computing, automation, and robotics.

However, first and foremost they must possess sufficient knowledge and the vision to use these resources most effectively.

 


Secondly, in a knowledge society, what we do not know is as important as what we do know. Leaders should know their limits and know how to acquire missing knowledge.

A leader of the future is more like a community manager rather than an authoritarian.

These days, we are observing the decline of traditional hierarchical models of organization.

Take a look at how the organization of governments has changed across Western societies in recent years.

A number of governments have introduced or reinforced public consultation processes as well as opened up public data for the benefit of their citizens.

These processes, by and large, will continue to grow.

As a result, the hierarchical model tends to be suppressed and replaced by horizontal structures among executives, leaders from different sectors, researchers and representatives from civic society.

Hierarchy fails in the digital age because it’s slow and bureaucratic, whereas the new world is constantly changing and requires immediate responses.

Information is key. In today’s world, power is not gained by expanding new territories or areas of influence but by deepening and widening networks and connections.

But what is the role of the individual or leader, or of qualities that distinguish one grain of sand from another?

Why leaders should turn their attention to tech for good

We have to shift our focus from the threat of new technologies to the opportunities they bring.

Of course, we cannot ignore the threat of new technologies.

In India, for example, around 850 government websites have been hacked since 2012.

Meanwhile, hackers recently breached US Government networks and stole more than 5.6 million fingerprint records from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

And the government is not always a victim, they can also be the predator.

Not long ago, Twitter warned a number of users that they may have been the target of a state-sponsored attack.

The debate concerning the threat of technologies, especially the internet, will never end. Policymakers have proposed different ways of regulating the web, but they always are one or two steps behind.

This is because law and regulations are stable and designed to be long-lasting, whereas the digital environment is changing rapidly.

As Hugh Fiennes, CEO of Electric Imp, puts it:

"The reality seems to be that when it comes to the internet-connected device there is no such thing as absolute security. Your device can start by being secure today and then not be secure tomorrow."

We do not claim that regulation is purely ineffective, and thus we should abandon any legal solutions for creating a more secure environment.

But we do suggest that we look at technologies through different lenses.

We can transform the one thing that is good and bad in breakthrough technologies - the human factor.

Having acknowledged that digital technology will play a decisive role our future, leaders cannot afford to show fear or reluctance in implementing it. Instead, they must embrace technology with a clear view of its potential.

We must set sail for new, ambitious lands.

We choose to go to Mars because our technology enables us to at least attempt the exploration on other planets by the 2030s.

And we choose to develop other fantastic things every day – self-driving cars, more powerful batteries, the Apple Watch, drones – to name only just a few.

A balanced mix of universal characteristics and digital leadership traits has the potential to guide us through years of transformation with optimism and idealism. Technology continues to prove that it can be used for the benefit of mankind, but only if we set sail on the right course and with the ri

weforum.org

martes, 7 de junio de 2016

Former NASA Chief Develops Brain-Like Chips

KnuEdge Chief Executive Dan Goldin, NASA Administrator from 1992-2001, at an agency symposium in 2010.

KnuEdge Chief Executive Dan Goldin, NASA Administrator from 1992-2001, 
at an agency symposium in 2010. 
PHOTO: NASA/BILL INGALLS

Dan Goldin’s startup, KnuEdge, has been working in secret for 10 years on a new kind of computing that mimics the human brain

Dan Goldin spent nine years as chief of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, overseeing complex projects like the international space station. Now he’s preparing for another challenging launch: a startup that has been working in secret for 10 years on a form of brain-like computing.

His San Diego-based company, KnuEdge, has developed an unusual processor chip and related hardware and software, aiming to bring dramatic speed improvements to tough chores like finding patterns in images, sounds and financial data. KnuEdge is disclosing its plans for the first time Monday, along with a parallel effort in software to help recognize speech in noisy environments.

Many companies are working in related areas, often loosely categorized under the term artificial intelligence. Most are using software that runs on time-tested varieties of computer hardware, not designing chips from scratch.

But there is a widening recognition that conventional processors may not be the best tools for all computing jobs. Nor are they increasing in speed as quickly as they once did, in part because of diminishing returns from miniaturizing circuitry under the pattern known as Moore’s Law.

In one high-profile effort, Google Inc. recently disclosed it is using an internally designed chip for chores related to machine learning, a branch of artificial intelligence, along with chips from Intel Corp. and graphical processing units from Nvidia Corp. International Business Machines Corp. also opted to design its own processor for specialized tasks that emulates aspects of the brain.

Mr. Goldin, who led the space agency from 1992 to 2001, had a similar inspiration. He started by studying with Nobel laureate Gerald Edelman, a prominent theorist on the workings of the brain who died in 2014.


“I was sick and tired of hearing the world is ending, Moore’s Law is dead,” he said. “We need to bring in neurobiology.”

Any kind of chip startup is a rarity these days, as venture capitalists prefer investments that take less time and money to produce a return. The 75-year-old Mr. Goldin, KnuEdge’s chief executive, said he managed to raise $100 million from individuals with the patience to wait for a payoff. KnuEdge hired expert talent slowly and selectively, he said, but the company now has 100 employees.

Conventional chips outperform humans at chores like high-speed mathematics and sifting through large databases. However, humans are far better at tasks like distinguishing one face or voice from another, partly because of the brain’s parallel structure.

Where a typical Intel chip might have one to a dozen or so processing cores, Mr. Goldin estimated that people have a couple of hundred billion neurons—the cells that process and transmit information. Each may be able to communicate to 10,000 to 100,000 others dispersed through the brain, he said.

KnuEdge’s first chip has 256 processor cores, each of which can be working on a different program—unlike some other chips with many cores that execute the same kind of instruction at once, Mr. Goldin said. It also developed a companion communication technology that can link up to 512,000 of the chips at extremely high speed.

“It is the ability to scale to unprecedented levels that makes us different,” Mr. Goldin said.

Mr. Goldin isn’t disclosing customers that have received the first circuit boards containing the KnuEdge chips.

But he expects financial-service firms may be particularly interested, for purposes such as analyzing patterns of transactions to prevent fraud. KnuEdge expects to begin selling boards and chassis based on the technology near the end of the third quarter.

Few outsiders have seen the technology in action. But Jim McGregor, an analyst at Tirias Research briefed on the company’s plans, said he expects such novel chip designs will play an important future role in tasks like machine learning.

“I think Dan is a pioneer of the inevitable future architecture trends in computer engineering,” said Larry Smarr, director of the California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technology, which expects to include KnuEdge’s hardware in a lab that will study pattern-recognition technology. “I think all major companies will be doing this.”

Don Clark

wsj.com

Google has developed a 'big red button' that can be used to interrupt artificial intelligence and stop it from causing harm

Stuart Armstrong

The Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford

Stuart Armstrong is a philosopher at the University of Oxford and one of the paper's authors.

Machines are becoming more intelligent every year thanks to advances being made by companies like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and many others.

AI agents, as they're sometimes known, can already beat us at complex board games like Go, and they're becoming more competent in a range of other areas.

Now a London artificial-intelligence research lab owned by Google has carried out a study to make sure that we can pull the plug on self-learning machines when we want to.

DeepMind, bought by Google for a reported 400 million pounds — about $580 million — in 2014, teamed up with scientists at the University of Oxford to find a way to make sure that AI agents don't learn to prevent, or seek to prevent, humans from taking control.

The paper — "Safely Interruptible Agents PDF," published on the website of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI) — was written by Laurent Orseau, a research scientist at Google DeepMind, Stuart Armstrong at Oxford University's Future of Humanity Institute, and several others.

The researchers explain in the paper's abstract that AI agents are "unlikely to behave optimally all the time." They add:

If such an agent is operating in real-time under human supervision, now and then it may be necessary for a human operator to press the big red button to prevent the agent from continuing a harmful sequence of actions — harmful either for the agent or for the environment — and lead the agent into a safer situation.

The researchers, who weren't immediately available for interviewing, claim to have created a "framework" that allows a "human operator" to repeatedly and safely interrupt an AI, while making sure that the AI doesn't learn how to prevent or induce the interruptions.

The authors write:

Safe interruptibility can be useful to take control of a robot that is misbehaving and may lead to irreversible consequences, or to take it out of a delicate situation, or even to temporarily use it to achieve a task it did not learn to perform or would not normally receive rewards for this.

The researchers found that some algorithms, such as "Q-learning" ones, are already safely interruptible, while others, like "Sarsa," aren't when they're off the shelf, but they can be modified relatively easily so they are.

"It is unclear if all algorithms can be easily made safely interruptible," the authors admit.

Nick Bostrom

srf
University of Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom

DeepMind's work with the Future of Humanity Institute is interesting: DeepMind wants to "solve intelligence" and create general purpose AIs, while the Future of Humanity Institute is researching potential threats to our existence.

The institute is led by Nick Bostrom, who believes that machines will outsmart humans within the next 100 years and thinks that they have the potential to turn against us.

Speaking at Oxford University in May 2015 at the annual Silicon Valley Comes to Oxford event, Bostrom said:

I personally believe that once human equivalence is reached, it will not be long before machines become superintelligent after that. It might take a long time to get to human level but I think the step from there to superintelligence might be very quick.

I think these machines with superintelligence might be extremely powerful, for the same basic reasons that we humans are very powerful relative to other animals on this planet.

It's not because our muscles are stronger or our teeth are sharper, it's because our brains are better.

DeepMind knows the technology that it's creating has the potential to cause harm.

The founders — Demis Hassabis, Mustafa Suleyman, and Shane Legg — allowed their company to be bought by Google on the condition that the search giant created an AI ethics board to monitor advances that Google makes in the field.

Who sits on this board and what they do, exactly, remains a mystery.

The founders have also attended and spoken at several conferences about ethics in AI, highlighting that they want to ensure the technology they and others are developing is used for good, not evil.

It's likely that they will look to incorporate some of the findings from the "Safely Interruptible Agents" paper into their work going forward.

Sam Shead