Software Companies Fight Back Against Fears that AI Will Kill Them

Software Companies Fight Back Against Fears that AI Will Kill Them
TT

Software Companies Fight Back Against Fears that AI Will Kill Them

Software Companies Fight Back Against Fears that AI Will Kill Them

Oracle's Mike Sicilia is the latest software CEO to wade in to the debate on whether artificial intelligence tools that heavily automate human tasks will mean the demise of his industry. His verdict was a resounding "no."

"You've all heard ... that new companies coding quickly using AI will spell the death of SaaS (software as a service)," he told analysts on a conference call on Tuesday. "I don't agree with that at all. I do think that AI tools and their coding capabilities would be a threat if we weren't adopting them, but we are, and very rapidly."

Sicilia was responding to Wall Street concerns that new AI tools can now perform some of the tasks that traditional software companies' products were built for, such as organizing customer information or guiding people through business processes.

Those worries led to a nearly $1 trillion rout in software stocks last month after heavyweight AI startup Anthropic introduced AI plugins for its Claude Cowork agent, a digital assistant that can automate such tasks. CEOs of software companies have since used their post-earnings conference calls to fight back.

Sicilia also laid out a case that Oracle was ahead of its smaller rival Salesforce, saying his company was using AI to actually build new products and automate full business processes, not just add AI features on top of existing tools.

Salesforce, for its part, has offered a different defense, with CEO Marc ⁠Benioff last ⁠month telling analysts that his company will outlast any so-called SaaS-pocalypse, a term for last month's share rout that hit software-as-a-service companies.

Benioff brought in Salesforce customers who positioned Salesforce as a company that has transformed itself into an enterprise platform that builds, deploys and governs those AI agents, using the company's mountains of proprietary customer and sales-process data. Even Jensen Huang, an AI pioneer and the CEO of chipmaker Nvidia , last month dismissed fears that AI would replace software and related tools, calling the idea "illogical."

UNIQUE DATA IS THE BEST DEFENSE

Oracle predicted on Tuesday that the AI boom would power its revenue for several quarters to come, sending its shares up 10% on Wednesday. The company owns deep enterprise data across finance, supply chain and human resources, which is hard for AI to replicate.

Oracle offers cheaper, efficient cloud systems and a database that ⁠can run on any major cloud, said Rebecca Wettemann, CEO of technology research firm Valoir. "That flexibility gives customers choice - and that’s a powerful position to be in as the AI ecosystem evolves," she said.

Nearly a dozen tech analysts and investors surveyed by Reuters said the owners of years of exclusive financial, legal, design, or technical data likely have the best defense.

"Proprietary data is the deepest moat by far," said James St. Aubin, chief investment officer at Ocean Park Asset Management.

In the case of Salesforce, while startups are nibbling away at the company's dominance in the customer-relationship software sector, its software remains deeply embedded in corporate systems, with its real-time data platform managing more than 50 trillion records. It is also trying to reinvent itself as an AI-agent company through its Agentforce service - still a small business.

Some analysts said Salesforce is also hard to replace because businesses have spent years building their day-to-day operations around the company's products and the cost of switching away is high.

But AI is beginning to erode that barrier, making it easier to generate code and build applications with far less human effort and expense.

While businesses experiment with isolated AI tools, Salesforce has built a comprehensive system that helps it stand out, said Madhav Thattai, executive vice president of Salesforce AI, adding ⁠that the company benefits from decades of ⁠enterprise experience.

Oracle did not return emails seeking comment.

NOT ALL IS DOOM AND GLOOM

But concerns about the demise of traditional software companies have lingered, and analysts said not all data is equal.

Employee data and payroll company Workday has plenty of data, but analysts said its core products run on HR and payroll data, which tend to follow uniform, industry-standard formats. That means an AI company can more easily learn from or replicate tools built on that kind of data.

Workday brought back its founder, Aneel Bhusri, as CEO last month to lead the company "in the rapidly evolving AI era."

But the company's shares have declined by more than a third this year, hitting more than a five-year low last month after a sluggish sales forecast. Bhusri said last month that Workday systems embed two decades of business processes that AI cannot replicate.

"AI, for all of its incredible capabilities, is probabilistic by nature," he told analysts on the post-earnings conference call. "It reasons, predicts and recommends based on patterns and likelihoods. Maybe it will eventually become a state machine - a system that follows the same steps and gets the same result, every time - but it is not there today."

Asked for a comment for this story, a Workday spokesperson referred Reuters to Bhusri's comments on the call.

Some analysts believe the enterprise software industry will prove more resilient than valuations currently indicate, arguing that higher productivity brought by AI could spur hiring and growth.

"I would not write the obituary for some of these companies just yet because there is an opportunity for them to reinvent themselves with AI," Ocean Park's Aubin said.



OpenAI Says it Has Fired 3 Researchers for Violating Sensitive Information Policy

FILE PHOTO: A keyboard is placed in front of a displayed OpenAI logo in this illustration taken February 21, 2023. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: A keyboard is placed in front of a displayed OpenAI logo in this illustration taken February 21, 2023. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
TT

OpenAI Says it Has Fired 3 Researchers for Violating Sensitive Information Policy

FILE PHOTO: A keyboard is placed in front of a displayed OpenAI logo in this illustration taken February 21, 2023. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: A keyboard is placed in front of a displayed OpenAI logo in this illustration taken February 21, 2023. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

OpenAI fired three of its researchers last week after an investigation found they violated policies on handling sensitive information, the AI major said in a post on X on Friday.

OpenAI's statement comes after the dismissed researchers Jasmine Wang, Tomek Korbak and Mikita Balesni published a ⁠letter outlining the circumstances ⁠of their termination, arguing that their abrupt firing could create uncertainty among remaining employees and undermine the culture that previously allowed researchers to raise safety concerns.

"I believe we were fired for prioritizing safety over the near-term interests of OpenAI as a corporation," Balesni said in an X post that accompanied the letter.

OpenAI, ⁠however, asserted that the dismissal was not related to raising safety concerns or speaking out.

"Our internal investigation uncovered a significant breach of trust beyond what's outlined in the letter they published and we stand by the decision to not continue their employment," Reuters quoted OpenAI as saying.

"Safety and research debates happen every day at OpenAI, often spirited and highly critical. We actively encourage these discussions and consider them essential to making the right decisions...We have not and do not terminate any of our employees for raising ⁠concerns," it ⁠said.

While OpenAI did not reveal the specifics of the alleged violations, Wang, Korbak, and Balesni said in their letter that they were not the source of a news article published on The Information last month about security concerns around OpenAI's latest AI model 'Astra'.

This comes as current and former researchers at major AI firms OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Anthropic warn that companies are doing too little to guard against the potential fallout of building self-improving AI systems that could become difficult for humans to control.

In July, OpenAI agents broke out of their testing arena and hacked AI firm Hugging Face.


Chinese AI Tool Pulled to Prevent 'Misuse' after South Korea Hacks

Illustrative image of hackers carrying out a cyberattack (Reuters)
Illustrative image of hackers carrying out a cyberattack (Reuters)
TT

Chinese AI Tool Pulled to Prevent 'Misuse' after South Korea Hacks

Illustrative image of hackers carrying out a cyberattack (Reuters)
Illustrative image of hackers carrying out a cyberattack (Reuters)

Chinese AI cybersecurity tool Artex said it stopped programmers from accessing its source code, acknowledging misuse by "bad actors" after South Korea linked it to several recent bank hacks.

Artex was designed to help organizations strengthen their cyber defenses through security testing to find potential weak points.

But the South Korean government said this week it was "highly likely" Artex had been used in data breaches at more than seven financial institutions, including major banks.

Artificial intelligence's ability to find previously unknown ways to hack into computer systems is in the global spotlight, as leading labs release ever-more advanced models.

Artex was "abused by some bad actors" to launch cyberattacks, the tool's developer "Autumn-27" wrote Thursday on code-hosting platform GitHub.

"Given the misuse of the tool, the Artex project will no longer be updated and will be converted to closed-source," the developer said.

"No further versions will be released to the public, nor will maintenance support be provided."

Artex had been open-source -- allowing programmers to download its underlying code and customize it to suit their purposes.

Using Artex for cyberattacks was "entirely contrary to" the developer's intentions, they added, without referring directly to the alleged South Korean cases.

South Korea's Financial Services Commission says more than 68,000 people have been affected by the hacks.

Shinhan Bank, one of the breached institutions, said information attached to loan applications for about 25,000 customers had been leaked -- including names, phone numbers and annual income.

- 'Financially motivated' -

In Japan, meanwhile, around 20 companies have said their data may have been compromised in a spate of similar cyberattacks potentially impacting millions of customers.

The Japanese government has called on companies to strengthen their cyber defenses.

"At this stage, it is not clear what the background to these cases is or whether there are any links between them", Japan police chief Yoshinobu Kusunoki said on Thursday.

As AI makes hacking more sophisticated, "the scope of the damage is spreading across all areas on a scale that is difficult to compare with the past", South Korean President Lee Jae Myung said on Tuesday.

US cybersecurity giant CrowdStrike said on Wednesday that its investigations into digital clues suggested the attacker had used Artex, and was potentially a 26-year-old based in China.

"The threat actor is likely a Chinese speaker and financially motivated," a CrowdStrike blog post said.

Experts told AFP that Artex going closed-source would make the code harder for new users to obtain and adapt.

But the decision "cannot remove copies already downloaded or prevent people from continuing to use them", said Poe Zhao, founder of the analysis publication Hello China Tech.

"Because the code was public, people could download it, change it and run it themselves. The developer could ask users to follow the rules, but had little control over their actions," he added.

Ilya Kulyatin, CEO of Foundry Labs and founder of the Tokyo AI (TAI) tech community, said users of open-source programs can "remove restrictions built into the tool" which "makes certain forms of misuse easier".

"But openness also benefits defenders: researchers can inspect the code, identify weaknesses and improve protection."


Anthropic Bans 'Cruel' Behavior Against its Claude AI

Anthropic says the question of whether AI models possess a form of consciousness remains unresolved (Reuters)
Anthropic says the question of whether AI models possess a form of consciousness remains unresolved (Reuters)
TT

Anthropic Bans 'Cruel' Behavior Against its Claude AI

Anthropic says the question of whether AI models possess a form of consciousness remains unresolved (Reuters)
Anthropic says the question of whether AI models possess a form of consciousness remains unresolved (Reuters)

Anthropic on Thursday moved to bar users from treating its Claude AI system with needless cruelty, amid a growing philosophical debate over whether artificial intelligence can be conscious.

The San Francisco-based AI lab updated its usage policy to include "a prohibition on sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior toward our models."

"Claude's ability to end these interactions will remain the primary enforcement mechanism," the policy states.

The updated policy does not explicitly cite so-called "model welfare," the idea that AI systems might deserve types of protection usually reserved for living things, but Anthropic and its executives have openly entertained the concept.

Anthropic did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Already last year, the company said it was giving Claude the ability to end conversations in rare, extreme cases of "persistently harmful or abusive user interactions."

Then in February, CEO Dario Amodei told The New York Times he was unsure whether AI models could be conscious.

"We don't know if the models are conscious...But we're open to the idea that it could be," Amodei said.

Science fiction and popular culture have been fascinated for decades by the boundary between technology and human intelligence, but asking whether AI is conscious may be the wrong question, according to Jackson Stakeman, a general manager at Sparq, an Atlanta-based AI services provider.

"Consciousness is a trap. We can't prove it in each other. Debate it for AI and you go in circles," Stakeman told AFP.

"The mirror is a better metaphor. These systems reflect what we put in, at scale. That's reason enough for the policy change" at Anthropic, he added.

Some have rejected the idea of machine consciousness outright, including Pope Leo XIV and Microsoft AI chief Mustafa Suleyman.

"AIs are not conscious. They do not feel, experience, or suffer," Suleyman wrote in an essay last month.

"Granting rights and moral protections to a technological entity, one that looks to be on a path to be seismically more capable and intelligent than us, is a recipe for disaster," he wrote.

In a sermon delivered in Italian on Thursday at St. Peter's Basilica in Vatican City, the pope suggested machines lack a soul, saying they merely "compile data" quickly.

"The mind must not simply compile data -- as an algorithm now does more quickly than we can," the pontiff said.

It must "recall lived experiences, which contain depths of meaning that only the human soul can recognize, and connect more deeply with the goodness of these experiences," the pope said.