| This is Bloomberg Opinion Today, a dense bean salad of Bloomberg Opinion's opinions. Sign up here. Picture this: You're at the grocery store, picking up items on your list. Some stuff you splurge on (good olive oil, mini mozzarella balls, organic cherry tomatoes, prosciutto), while others are nothing fancy (two types of beans, a red onion). When you go to the self-checkout, another shopper saddles up next to you. You see can't help but notice that she has a pretty similar basket of items — there's generic olive oil, cheese, a conventional tomato, and — look! You: "We got the same exact beans!" Shopper: "Oh my gosh. How funny." You: "I have to ask: Are you making a dense bean salad??" Shopper: "YES! I am addicted to the DBS. Violet Witchel is a GENIUS."
The two of you bond over your mutual love of fiber and continue to scan your items. But when you ring up your cannellini beans, you're shocked by the price. You glance over at the other shopper's screen and see that her beans were only $1.99. Yours were almost double that. You shake your head, cursing the store's behavioral tracking technology. Clearly, the itty bitty cameras next to the electronic shelf labels recognized that you were willing to shell out the big bucks on some items and now it thinks you're Daddy Warbucks. It sounds like something out of a dystopian novel, and yet: The fact that America's second most-popular grocery store chain could soon be experimenting with electronic shelving labels and facial recognition to track us and change prices at the drop of a hat is just one of many reasons people are increasingly wary of artificial intelligence. Nobody wants their cannellini beans to be priced like concert tickets or international flights, but that's the direction we seem to be headed in. Not only do many of these AI algorithms have racial, gender and socioeconomic bias built into their DNA, but Big Tech has a perverse incentive to roll them out prematurely: "In this modern-day gold rush, the people making the pickaxes are already benefiting handsomely. Since the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, investors have added a staggering $8.2 trillion to the market valuations of tech's Big Six firms," Parmy Olson writes (free read). And they're spending that money in the hopes that they can profit even more: Liam Denning says Google, Microsoft and Amazon are investing in zero-carbon nuclear power "to aid the race for AI dominance." While Big Tech's market value has popped, the number of people who have confidence in these companies has shrunk to 27% in 2024, down from 32% in 2020. Plus, around 65% of Americans don't trust CEOs that develop AI models to build and regulate their products responsibly. So how can we solve the problem? It's not as though we'll start avoiding the grocery store. And trust or no, we can't get people to stop using Big Tech products like social media. Parmy says "most are resigned to using tech platforms anyway. They're our social infrastructure, mildly addictive and inescapably dominant in the marketplace." Even Facebook's Cambridge Analytica scandal didn't stop it from gaining 900 million new users across the globe: But not all hope is lost. Dave Lee says California's "surgical" approach to AI regulation might serve as a guide for lawmakers across the country. At the end of the 2024 legislative season, 38 AI-related bills were sitting on Governor Gavin Newsom's desk, and a good chunk of them actually got signed. "California's legislative productivity should counterbalance the worry that Washington's paralysis on tech lawmaking will extend into the AI era," he writes. The key to the state's success? It's not putting all its eggs in one basket. Dave says "smaller, discreet" bills are easier to pass than broad, buzzy bills such as SB 1047, which would have forced many Silicon Valley wunderkinds to install a "kill switch" on their AI models. If only there was a bill that would ensure my beans will always cost the same as yours. Bonus Tech Reading: - TikTok's legal troubles are a harsh reality for China's AI startups. — Catherine Thorbecke
- Taiwan markets are beating the world thanks to its tech-driven halo. — Matthew Winkler
While we're on the topic of trust, here's a chart from Lisa Jarvis that does not instill much confidence in the dozen-plus smoke shops in my neighborhood: Pot is becoming more potent, but the green stuff stores are selling is still very much a mystery. Lisa says public health officials and marijuana users alike are having a hard time figuring out what's "safe" when it comes to smoking weed. "Health officials have clear guidelines to offer the public about alcohol — everyone's doctor has a handy chart from the CDC outlining just how many drinks per week is considered safe," she writes. "But when it comes to THC? We've got next to nothing." Bad actors aren't helping matters. Matt Levine says plenty of cannabis empires are just smoke-covered pump-and-dump schemes. And even when there are actual products on shelves, the business may not be legit. A lot of smoke shops in the city, for instance — the ones you see with the bouncers and the bean bags strewn all over the sidewalk — are illegal. In the spring, one of them was shut down in my neighborhood and it's sat vacant with this ominous sign on it ever since: While New York has cracked down on cannabis retailers, not every state has an "Operation Padlock." And the public perception of drug use continues to relax (see: Brat). Just this week, Vice President Kamala Harris confirmed she's all for marijuana legalization, and more Americans are hitting weed pens and ripping bongs than ever before. Lisa points to an analysis that found daily or near-daily cannabis has surpassed regular alcohol consumption. These days, THC comes in all shapes, sizes and formats. With a few clicks on the internet, anyone — even kids — can get their hands on sugar-coated soft chews or cotton candy-flavored kush. "In an era where cannabis can be purchased legally in so many states (and, under Harris's plan, could be available nationwide), the public deserves to know when their use could be putting their health at risk," Lisa writes. Read the whole thing. Last night, Victoria's Secret came back from its fashion show hiatus and pulled out all the greats — Cher, Gigi Hadid, Kate Moss, Tyra Banks — and … nobody seemed to care? New York Times' Vanessa Friedman said "the whole thing seemed less like a step forward than a hokey high school reunion" and Allure's Nicola Dall'Asen said she "was bored to tears," despite the runway showcasing more inclusive body types. It's perhaps the clearest distillation of how out of touch the fashion world has become. Nobody wants what's on the rack anymore! And that's not just true of the troubled lingerie giant; luxury behemoths are struggling to stay relevant, too. Even "Bernard Arnault's mighty LVMH hasn't escaped the bursting of the bling bubble," Andrea Felsted writes. "The owner of Louis Vuitton and Dior reported its first decline in sales since the pandemic," and things could get worse before they get better.  Yesterday, former President Donald Trump told the editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News that tariff increases will have a massive, "positive effect." Ernie Tedeschi — the director of economics at the Budget Lab at Yale University— is here to pour cold water on all that. "There are several asterisks when it comes to tariffs as a revenue raiser," he writes. For starters, Trump could aggravate some countries enough that they'll retaliate. Prices would rise and real household incomes would decline. There's also a risk that the economy could shrink: "As much as $325 billion would be shaved off US gross domestic product, vastly reducing the envisioned fiscal benefits," he writes. So, sure, tariffs will have a "massive effect," but perhaps not in the way Trump envisioned. Democratic institutions matter, for rich and poor nations alike. — Bloomberg's editorial board Israel is gaslighting United Nations peacekeepers in Lebanon. — Marc Champion Democrats need to figure out how to win Latino voters back. — Erika D. Smith America's official policy toward Greater China is riddled with contradictions. — Andreas Kluth A dispute between the Premier League and Manchester City has both sides claiming victory. — Matthew Brooker Central America's economies are transforming in ways that could speed up development. — Juan Pablo Spinetto Kenya's history of battles between presidents and deputies suggests a long leadership contest ahead. — Justice Malala A fentanyl vaccine has a shot at working. Morgan Stanley is moving and grooving. JD Vance's adviser was too active on Reddit. A bunch of lawsuits are shaping the election. The largest supermoon starts tonight. Eater launched a restaurant discovery app. A Russian man was rescued after 67 days at sea. An exotic wild cat roamed around Chicago. Notes: Please send caracal kittens and feedback to Jessica Karl at jkarl9@bloomberg.net. Sign up here and follow us on Threads, TikTok, Twitter, Instagram and Facebook. | 
No comments:
Post a Comment