Who the fuck wrote such a terrible article? What is described is not a problem with AI per se, but rather automation and poor security. AI may be part of that automation system, but this is a trend which started with the dot com bubble and not something new.
Besides, the models they reference to check plant diseases and so on are most definitely not the LLMs which have now become synonyms of AI.
Sure, a cyber attack can lock down your production; but it is mostly not AI who generated this problem. It may intensify the problem, but as of now we don’t have many examples in which that happened.
It’s clickbait. Since AI is tangentially related they can drive engagement by headlining it, even if the actual crux of the situation isn’t about that.
This should have many more upvotes. The security incidents quoted at the start of this article have no relation to its actual topic, i.e. the hypothesis that there may be increased fragility of supply chains as a result of AI adoption. While it’s plausible this may happen, the article makes it sound like this has happened when it clearly hasn’t. In other words: it’s little more than “hurr, durr, AI dangerous”.
Computers used for logistics dates from 80s. Ransomware shutting down a system is a computer system vulnerability, but the right headline is “computer systems fail, we need to back to abacus”.
Who the fuck wrote such a terrible article? What is described is not a problem with AI per se, but rather automation and poor security. AI may be part of that automation system, but this is a trend which started with the dot com bubble and not something new. Besides, the models they reference to check plant diseases and so on are most definitely not the LLMs which have now become synonyms of AI.
Sure, a cyber attack can lock down your production; but it is mostly not AI who generated this problem. It may intensify the problem, but as of now we don’t have many examples in which that happened.
It’s clickbait. Since AI is tangentially related they can drive engagement by headlining it, even if the actual crux of the situation isn’t about that.
This should have many more upvotes. The security incidents quoted at the start of this article have no relation to its actual topic, i.e. the hypothesis that there may be increased fragility of supply chains as a result of AI adoption. While it’s plausible this may happen, the article makes it sound like this has happened when it clearly hasn’t. In other words: it’s little more than “hurr, durr, AI dangerous”.
Computers used for logistics dates from 80s. Ransomware shutting down a system is a computer system vulnerability, but the right headline is “computer systems fail, we need to back to abacus”.
AI