Connect with us

Business

Put AI to work for people

Published

on



Reasonable people from all sides of the current AI conversation agree that this particular paradigm shift is just different. If you don’t believe that, record 20 minutes of your own stream of consciousness with an application like Otter and ask it to summarize your thoughts. Or download RunwayML and have it turn photos of your friends into videos of them doing the tango.

These tools – and countless others – offer an endless array of capabilities to test the limits of what humanity has created in the centuries to date. Some of it just plain blows the mind.

But while we’re busy having our minds blown, we’re also drifting into something of a context-distortion field. 

If you never watched chef and food documentarian Anthony Bourdain, he said “context and memory play powerful roles in all the truly great meals in one’s life.”

That’s true of great technological evolutions, too. 

Leaving aside the oversimplification that “AI” is a singular technology (it isn’t), it’s long past time for the “AI is eating the world” bumper stickers to evolve into how we manage this wave of change so it helps people, serves society and protects both. 

Here we need some basic parameters. 

First, everyone should get AI. Everyone should work and practice with it. Notwithstanding the burst bubble, people who leaned into the internet early developed a sharper understanding of the burgeoning internet economy. The experts say AI will create more wealth and opportunity than the internet. For those who rightly point out the widening gap between the ultra-wealthy and everyone else, we can’t leave people without the tools to participate as another massive tidal wave of change hits the global economy. As one alarming example, an estimated 700 million people in Africa have no access to electricity. For such a young continent with so much potential, we can’t leave nearly a billion people with no access and expect this to go well for the world. On every level – from infrastructure to access to training and enablement, let’s get serious about how this can be humanity’s big moment.  

Second, we should remember the things that make humans what we are. EQ is more powerful than AI. While these generative AI tools can simulate engagement at a remarkable conversational level, they are simply gathering information from across the open internet and distilling that into conversational terms. Is it occasionally fun to ask AI for relationship advice or treat it like a loyal pal? Sure. Should we be polite when we work with it and treat it with respect? No harm there. But it’s not another person. It doesn’t care about us the way we care about each other. And most importantly, it’s very hard for it to police its own limitations. Only we can do that. 

Third, tools that work great for us as individuals have always worked differently for us as a collective. In other words: any one of us can decide to do something on our own, and that thing can go well or go wrong based on the inputs by the individual. Add a second individual to this scenario, and you have a need for collaboration and coordination. This is a mountain that humanity has been working to climb since the dawn of civilization. Newsflash: we’re lousy at it. Our egos and self-interests and preferences and quirks – these are very difficult to blend in a cohesive fashion. Especially when the task before us is hard. 

The term enterprise comes from the old French word entreprendre. It means, “to undertake.”  In the context of AI…enterprise AI will follow a familiar path as previous technological waves. Bourdain’s quote – we need context and memory.

New technologies at work cause something of a feeding frenzy. We build a lot; we buy a lot. Some of it crosses over from our personal tools. Some of it gets infused into the tools we’re already using. Anytime a new technology comes to work, it’s an asset. And we need to understand that asset, what it’s configured to do, what data it is allowed to access and who is authorized to direct it. This work is as unglamourous as it is mission critical. 

These same new technologies instantly become proxies for the exact same arguments we were already having. “Who put you in charge of that?!” “My way of solving that problem is better than your way!” “Who moved my cheese?!” 

If you need a metaphor, think of this like a busy airport. It’s noisy and crowded. There’s equipment everywhere. The schedule constantly changes and things we can’t control often influence the operation more than the things we can.

This isn’t to imply enterprise AI or work AI won’t be exceedingly powerful – it will. But only with the proper governance (a control tower). And that’s not a task we should relegate to an experiment. That’s a big responsibility, deserving of credibility earned from past experience. In other words, we need context from people and systems that have been through big changes before. 

And one last point: jobs. History shows that new technologies have an undeniable impact on how the workforce is structured and the jobs filled by people. This is already unfolding in the AI wave. Here the cautionary note is perhaps the strongest. AI must not become a codeword for layoffs. We can’t let it be filed under “maximize profit at the expense of the human workforce.” If we allow it down that path, trust will be shattered beyond our ability to repair it. AI at work should be a cheering moment for people, because we gave them the runway and empowerment to rethink things we all know are broken. Because we figured out how to give people an extra hour or two in their day to be with their family and friends. Because we made this a 1+1=5 equation for people to accomplish so much more with AI’s help. 

If we’re mindful of this context, we’ll put AI to work for people. Which is the opportunity of our lifetime.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

49-year-old Democrat who owns a gourmet olive oil store swipes another historically Republican district from Trump and Republicans

Published

on



Democrat Eric Gisler claimed an upset victory Tuesday in a special election in a historically Republican Georgia state House district.

Gisler said he was the winner of the contest, in which he was leading Republican Mack “Dutch” Guest by about 200 votes out of more than 11,000 in final unofficial returns.

Robert Sinners, a spokesperson with the secretary of state’s office, said there could be a few provisional ballots left before the tally is finalized.

“I think we had the right message for the time,” Gisler told The Associated Press in a phone interview. He credited his win to Democratic enthusiasm but also said some Republicans were looking for a change.

“A lot of what I would call traditional conservatives held their nose and voted Republican last year on the promise of low prices and whatever else they were selling,” Gisler said. “But they hadn’t received that.”

Guest did not immediately respond to a text message seeking comment late Tuesday.

Democrats have seen a number of electoral successes in 2025 as the party’s voters have been eager to express dissatisfaction with Republican President Donald Trump.

In Georgia in November, they romped to two blowouts in statewide special elections for the Public Service Commission, unseating two incumbent Republicans in campaigns driven by discontent over rising electricity costs.

Nationwide, Democrats won governor’s races by broad margins in Virginia and New Jersey. On Tuesday a Democrat defeated a Trump-endorsed Republican in the officially nonpartisan race for Miami mayor, becoming the first from his party to win the post in nearly 30 years.

Democrats have also performed strongly in some races they lost, such as a Tennessee U.S. House race last week and a Georgia state Senate race in September.

Republicans remain firmly in control of the Georgia House, but their majority is likely fall to 99-81 when lawmakers return in January. Also Tuesday, voters in a second, heavily Republican district in Atlanta’s northwest suburbs sent Republican Bill Fincher and Democrat Scott Sanders to a Jan. 6 runoff to fill a vacancy created when Rep. Mandi Ballinger died.

The GOP majority is down from 119 Republicans in 2015. It would be the first time the GOP holds fewer than 100 seats in the lower chamber since 2005, when they won control for the first time since Reconstruction.

The race between Gisler and Guest in House District 121 in the Athens area northeast of Atlanta was held to replace Republican Marcus Wiedower, who was in the seat since 2018 but resigned in the middle of this term to focus on business interests.

Most of the district is in Oconee County, a Republican suburb of Athens, reaching into heavily Democratic Athens-Clarke County. Republicans gerrymandered Athens-Clarke to include one strongly Democratic district, parceling out the rest of the county into three seats intended to be Republican.

Gisler ran against Wiedower in 2024, losing 61% to 39%. This year was Guest’s first time running for office.

A Democrat briefly won control of the district in a 2017 special election but lost to Wiedower in 2018.

Gisler, a 49-year-old Watkinsville resident, works for an insurance technology company and owns a gourmet olive oil store. He campaigned on improving health care, increasing affordability and reinvesting Georgia’s surplus funds

Guest is the president of a trucking company and touted his community ties, promising to improve public safety and cut taxes. He was endorsed by Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, an Athens native, and raised far more in campaign contributions than Gisler.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Rivian CEO says it’s a misconception EVs are politicized, with a 50-50 party split among R1 buyers

Published

on



If Rivian’s sales are any indication, owning an electric vehicle isn’t such a partisan issue, despite President Donald Trump’s rollbacks of mandates, incentives, and targets for EVs.

At the Fortune Brainstorm AI conference in San Francisco on Tuesday, Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe said it’s a misconception that electrification is politicized, explaining that most customers buy a product based on how it fits their needs, not their ideology. The questions car buyers ask, he said, are the same whether they’re purchasing one with an internal-combustion engine or a battery: “Is it exciting? Are you attracted to the product? Does it draw you in? Does the brand positioning resonate with you? Do the features answer needs that you have?”

Buyers of Rivian’s R1 electric SUV are split roughly 50-50 between Republicans and Democrats, Scaringe told Fortune’s Andrew Nusca. “I think that’s extraordinarily powerful news for us to recognize—that this isn’t just left-leaning buyers,” he added. “These are people that are saying, ‘I like the idea of this product, I’m excited about it.’ And this is thousands and thousands of customers. This is statistically relevant information.”

Buying an EV was once an indication of left-leaning politics, but the politics got scrambled after Tesla CEO Elon Musk became the top Republican donor and a close adviser to Trump. That drew some new customers to Tesla, and turned off a lot of progressive EV buyers, with many existing owners putting bumper stickers on their Teslas explaining that they bought their cars before Musk’s hard-right turn. Trump and Musk later had a stunning public feud, in part over the administration’s elimination of EV and solar tax credits.

But Scaringe said he started Rivian with a long-term view, independent of any policy framework or political trends. He also insisted that if Americans have more EV choices, sales would follow. Right now, Tesla dominates a key corner of the market, namely EVs in the $50,000 price range. Rivian’s forthcoming R2 mid-size SUV will represent a new choice in that market, with a starting price of $45,000 versus the R1’s $70,000.

Ten years from now, Scaringe said he hopes—and believes—that EV adoption in the U.S. will be meaningfully higher than it is today across the board, explaining that the main constraint isn’t on the demand side. Instead, it’s on the supply side, which suffers from “a shocking lack of choice,” especially compared to Europe and China, he added. EV options in the U.S. are limited by the fact that Chinese brands are shut out of the market.

More choices for U.S. EV buyers would presumably create more competition for Rivian—and indeed, the flood of low-priced Chinese EVs in other auto markets has created a backlash, with countries such as Canada imposing steep tariffs on them. But Scaringe appears to view more competition as positive for the market overall.

“I do think that the existence of choice will help drive more penetration, and it actually creates a unique opportunity in the United States,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Powell warns of a ‘very unusual’ economy as inflation remains high amid a weakening job market

Published

on



Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday described the U.S. economy as “very unusual,” saying policymakers are navigating a rare combination of tariff-driven goods inflation and a labor market that may already be weaker than official data suggests.

The Fed cut interest rates for the third consecutive meeting, a quarter-point reduction Powell framed not as a confident pivot toward easier policy, but as a defensive move meant to keep the labor market from slipping further. He repeatedly emphasized risks to employment have risen “in recent months,” and noted that behind the headline numbers, job creation may already be negative.

Powell made the striking admission the Fed believes the official payroll figures—which have slowed sharply since the summer—are overstating job growth by roughly 60,000 per month. 

“Forty thousand jobs could be negative 20,” he said, adding this dynamic is not well understood by the public because unemployment claims remain historically low—something both economists Mark Zandi and Claudia Sahm recently toldFortune could be giving people a false sense of security about the job market.

“I think a world where job creation is negative… we need to watch that very carefully,” Powell said. 

It is this weakening backdrop Powell said makes the current moment “very unusual”: Inflation remains elevated, but most of the remaining overshoot comes from goods categories directly affected by tariffs, as opposed to domestic economic overheating, which he said the Fed has worked hard to cool since its 2022 highs; inflation excluding tariff-affected goods is “in the low [two percent],” he said. Services inflation is cooling, wage pressures are easing, and neither the labor market nor business surveys suggest a “Phillips-curve” kind of inflation threat, Powell said, referring to the inverse relationship between inflation and unemployment. 

Instead, Powell said, the bulk of the problem is a “one-time price increase” pushing up goods categories as import levies work their way through supply chains. Goods inflation, he noted, should peak around the first quarter of 2026, assuming no additional tariff rounds.

Those crosscurrents have fractured the Fed. Three officials formally dissented from the rate cut on Wednesday, and several others offered what Powell described as “soft dissents,” when an official’s personal projection falls out of what they ultimately voted for. There were six such “soft dissents” this time, during one of the deepest divides inside the FOMC in years, driven by disagreement over how to weigh the risks of lingering inflation against the possibility that job growth is weaker—and much more fragile—than reported.

Powell stressed that policymakers cannot simply choose one mandate to prioritize. 

“There is no risk-free path,” he said, a refrain he’s repeated for months. “When both sides of the mandate are threatened, you should be kind of neutral.” 

He characterized the current stance as being at the “high end” of neutral, allowing the Fed to “wait and see” how the data evolve.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.