Alan Turing Institute Plans Revamp in Face of Criticism and Technological Change 29
Britain's flagship AI agency will slash the number of projects it backs and prioritize work on defense, environment and health as it seeks to respond to technological advances and criticism of its record. From a report: The Alan Turing Institute -- named after the pioneering British computer scientist -- will shut or offload almost a quarter of its 101 current initiatives and is considering job cuts as part of a change programme that led scores of staff to write a letter expressing their loss of confidence in the leadership in December.
Jean Innes, appointed chief executive in July 2023, argued that huge advances in AI meant the Turing needed to modernise after being founded as a national data science institute by David Cameron's government a decade ago this month. "The Turing has chalked up some really great achievements," Innes said in an interview. "[But we need] a big strategic shift to a much more focused agenda on a small number of problems that have an impact in the real world." A review last year by UK Research and Innovation, the government funding body, found "a clear need for the governance and leadership structure of the Institute to evolve." It called for a move away from the dominance of universities to a structure more representative of AI in UK.
Jean Innes, appointed chief executive in July 2023, argued that huge advances in AI meant the Turing needed to modernise after being founded as a national data science institute by David Cameron's government a decade ago this month. "The Turing has chalked up some really great achievements," Innes said in an interview. "[But we need] a big strategic shift to a much more focused agenda on a small number of problems that have an impact in the real world." A review last year by UK Research and Innovation, the government funding body, found "a clear need for the governance and leadership structure of the Institute to evolve." It called for a move away from the dominance of universities to a structure more representative of AI in UK.
Re:Went DEI, went broke (Score:4, Informative)
Alan Turing would be considered “DEI” today.
Re: (Score:3)
It's actually really sad how the British government has soiled his name lately, with both the Turing Institute and the Turing Scheme. The latter is our pathetic attempt to replace Erasmus, the EU scheme that allows students to go and study almost anywhere in Europe. It's a poor scheme with limited options and worse terms than the one it is supposed to replace.
And yes, being gay he would have been dismissed as a DEI hire. In fact some places are starting to slide back to the kind of conversion therapy that e
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, being gay he would have been dismissed as a DEI hire. In fact some places are starting to slide back to the kind of conversion therapy that ended up killing him.
You need to upgrade your chart: being a gay white male is currently lower on the progressive stack than female.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Went DEI, went broke (Score:5, Insightful)
The very reason DEI programs were implemented in the first place is because non-white, non-male, non-straight candidates were systematically rejected from all levels of governement and industry, regardless of competence, and had been for decades, if not centuries.
Want to get rid of DEI ? Then get rid of homophobic, sexist, racist pigs. Don't elect them president.
Re: (Score:2)
Hillary was a shit DEI candidate who brought us Trump 1.
Harris was a shit DEI candidate who brought us Trump 2.
And DEI is the reason the Dems will lose again.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What a sad angry individual you are.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless of course they are, like you, sexist and racist.
Re: (Score:2)
THAT IS SEXIST AND RACIST, YOU SAD PATHETIC MORON.
Re: (Score:2)
Hillary was a woman candidate who brought us Trump 1.
Harris was a woman candidate who brought us Trump 2.
FTFY.
Remember the "get rid of homophobic, sexist, racist pigs" bit from the post? That includes your own behavior.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, fuck off, you hateful woke, sexist, racist cunt.
Perhaps some self reflection is in order.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps some self reflection is in order.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember the "get rid of homophobic, sexist, racist pigs" bit from the post? That includes your own behavior.
Hillary and Harris were both crap candidates, and the fact that you can't see that over their gender is why the sex/orientation/race grifting (first with critical theory, now with DEI) made everything worse compared to any other civil rights movement in the west.
defense, environment and health (Score:2)
... and prioritize work on defense, environment and health
In that order? You know that these objectives are not exactly compatible, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
You know that these objectives are not exactly compatible, do you?
Which one(s) are you going to throw out in favor of whatever is left? People balance between competing objectives all the time. Life would be easy if there was one global optimum that people could chase, but there's not.
75 year effect happening (Score:2)
Events and people from 75 years ago, monuments, research agencies, research fields, political offices, street names, etc. are being replaced by newer things
It's been happening for more than 200 years, slowly, less visible things, including vanity museums and institutes, lose their benefactors in the private wealthy class and politicians.
It fits the lifespan of people who built their employment around celebrating, or monetizing if you are cynical, a historical person or event.
For example: Find the WWI relate
Re: (Score:2)
How so? If you have supremely good defence, you don't ever need to actually use any of your weapons. Therefore, health and the environment are actually improved.
If however, you do feel the need to use your weapons, then it's not your health that's impacted, but rather more that of your enemy. If you are affected, then you ought to be affected less than your enemy is.
Granted, there's only one environment, and so you are hurting yourself to some extent that way. However, if you've done an excess of good in yo
Re: (Score:2)
If you have supremely good defence, you don't ever need to actually use any of your weapons.
I am reminded of an Eddie Izzard bit about a guidance counselor:
And he took me aside, he said, "Whatcha you want to do, kid? Whatcha you want to do? Tell me, tell me your dreams!"
"I want to be a space astronaut! Go to outer space, discover things that have never been discovered."
He said, "Look, you're British, so scale it down a bit, all right?"
"All right, I want to work in a shoe shop then! Discover shoes that no one's ever discovered right in the back of the shop, on the left."
And he said, "Look, you're British, so scale it down a bit, all right?"
More seriously, it's not realistic to expect that kind of advantage. It has hardly ever occurred, and nuclear weapons are so astoundingly destructive that it's unlikely that any degree of technical superiority will prevent military conflict.
Re: (Score:2)
... and prioritize work on defense, environment and health
In that order? You know that these objectives are not exactly compatible, do you?
Rather ironic that "defense" is defined by Yours and Mine. If humans didn't piss away the last few thousand years killing each other arguing over what happens when you die and lines drawn in sand with blood, an entire planet would have plenty of resources to focus on environment and human health.
So, what won't it be doing now? (Score:2)
Don't tell me, let me guess... (Score:2)
Would those cuts be the people who signed the letter stating they lacked faith in their leadership? That's the typical result for doing such a brazenly defiant act. Bosses don't like being told they suck at their job. Especially by a group. It's a good way to paint a target on your back as a run-of-the-mill employee. Not that I think that's right, but sometimes we have to deal with the reality we live in, not the idealized world we've been day-dreaming about.
Do mention (Score:2)
when an article is behind a paywall.
Quite annoying.