上田裕資 Yuji Ueda

Contributing editor of Forbes Japan 　ニュース編集者として「フォーブスジャパン」のアジア及びテクノロジー系ニュース担当。連絡先　yujixyアット

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

LA最終日は昨年6月にNYで取材したレフ・フィリモノフのベニスビーチの家に遊びに行って話を聞いた。NFTからは、しばらく距離を置いてスケーターのSNSに専念するとのこと。ニッチなSNSはまだまだ伸び代があるという話に説得力があった。投資家も彼の判断を支持しているとか。
https://t.co/duzydqvQJ3

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

君は知られざる昭和の奇習「乾布摩擦」を知っているか？ https://t.co/Jj7yIWIOkd

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

一億人の個人情報を700ドルで売ろうとしている。結局その程度の価値しかないのではという指摘があってなるほどと思った
https://t.co/IDYzFWB4FF

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

今から15年ぐらい前、アプリの仕事をしてた頃、「〇〇というアプリを“とっている"」と話す人がいて、変な言葉だなぁと思っていた。今日は焼肉きんぐのアプリで個人情報が流出したというニュースで、久しぶりにアプリを"とっていた"と証言する客がいた。この"アプリをとる"というのは、新聞をとるとかのとると同じなのかどうなのか。

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

〈【1929（昭和4）年、長野県松本市の裕福な種苗業の家に生まれた草間は、少女時代から幻覚や幻聴を感じ、それらを絵にすることで自らを支えた。〉

追悼】草間彌生「死んだ後にこそ作家の価値が決まる」…対談で"本気のケンカ"をしたもう一人の鬼才の名前" https://t.co/UBIp0btJJu

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

なるほど。新潮は本来の意地悪なスタンスで大村知事批判をやっていて、これを読むとだいたい状況が把握できる。

「名古屋の悪夢」とまで…愛知アジア大会が世界から連日酷評も記者会見から“逃亡”し続ける大村秀章知事　記者クラブからの要請も「公務」を理由に欠席(デイリー新潮)
#Yahooニュース
https://t.co/htPBUdRbcJ

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

「AIで勝手に伝記を書かれた」米紙記者が出会ったAIスロップの「中の人」 https://t.co/vvFyYvwxLh

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

【完全無人タクシー】Waymo・GO・日本交通が来年東京で運行へ！テスラ「サイバーキャブ」も日本初公開 自動運転で遅れた理由は？｜アベプラ https://t.co/fPOaw0yYS7 @YouTubeより

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

ザッカーバーグはきっと、ダリオアモデイみたいな奴のことをぽっと出の野郎だと思っていて、俺のほうがこの業界長いんだぞと言いたいんだろう。

[Kylie Robison @kyliebytes]

i have watched this video 20 times

[Kylie Robison @kyliebytes]

i have watched this video 20 times

[德州洞察 @TX_InsightCN]

这两天YouTube上有一个视频杀疯了，
成都女孩“墨韵”用咱们两千多年历史的古筝，
翻弹了老鹰乐队的摇滚神曲《加州旅馆》，
狂揽两千多万播放量，底下的老外在评论区直接听懵了。

《加州旅馆》最绝的就是那段吉他Solo，
而墨韵硬是用古筝清脆悠扬的拨弦声，
把这段西方摇滚的经典神仙还原了。
她用现场循环演奏的方式，
把摇滚的狂野律动和东方民乐的韵味完美融合。
很多外国网友惊呼，这绝对是他们听过最不可思议、最美妙的翻唱版本，硬生生让咱们这门历史悠久的传统乐器在全球狠狠圈了一波粉。

这段旋律对咱们在美国、尤其是德州生活的华人来说，
听着感受极其奇妙。德州本来就是一个极度热爱经典摇滚和吉他文化的地方，平时大家开着车在高速上，电台里最常放的公路神曲就是这首。但当这首刻进美国人骨子里的旋律，顺着咱们老祖宗的古筝弦流淌出来时，那种东方底蕴跟西方经典完美碰撞的感觉，
真的让人头皮发麻，又极其自豪。
我们的文化不仅能高山流水，玩起经典流行一样能惊艳世界。

[藤巻健史 @fujimaki_takesi]

繰り返す。円の危機が迫っていることをトランプ氏の発言から認識した方が良い。
高市総理はトランプ大統領が『円安によって米国の貿易が厳しい』と語ったとおっしゃるが、そんなはずはない。米国は日本と円が「崖っぷちにいる」からこそこじつけの「助け船」発言をしただけだ。
その方が米国へのダメージが小さくなると判断したからだろう。
しかし米国の助け舟では円安の方向は全く変わらない。確立された金融論で「やっては絶対ダメ」とされている財政ファイナンスを異次元の規模で行っきたのだから解決策（＝出口）はもうない。
円の危機が迫っていることをトランプ氏の発言から認識した方が良い。
年間平均のドル円レートが１０７円だった２０００年の米国の対日本財貿易赤字は８１６億ドル、年間平均のドル円レートが１５０円だった２０２５年の米国の対日本財貿易赤字は６４４億ドル。
大巾に円安になったのに対日本財貿易赤字は縮小している。「円安で米国の貿易が苦しい」はずはない。
しかも円ドルコミティーが創設された１９８３年から８４年のように日本が米国のて最大の財貿易赤字国だった時とは様変わりで、今や日本は８番目だ。
「人民元安で米国の貿易が苦しい」というのならわかるが「円安で米国の貿易が苦しい」などと日本政府も思っているのならおこがましい。
対日本の財貿易赤字が減ろうと増えようと米国は痛くもかゆくもない。情けないことだが。

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

AIでクオリティが落ちた外注さんが、自分では気づけてないという怖い話｜片山良平＠Eldipa代表、paiza創業者 @rk611 #仕事について話そう https://t.co/IliQW0y8Ju

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

ロシア国営メディア

[Sputnik 日本 @sputnik_jp]

【👨: 赤信号、漕ぎ渡っていい？　👮‍♂️: 今日だけはお咎めなし！】

バンコクでサップに乗りが結婚式に急行。式進行役らしく、自分がいないと始まらない。警官は赤信号「無視」にも目をつぶった。彼のSNSの話によれば、式には無事セーフ。式後でもデリバリー役から運転手まで数役をこなす羽目に。

[ふどあ @fd_a_e]

中国、AIクソ動画のクオリティがあまりにも高すぎる

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

ラッパー 田我流 あまりにも共感できすぎるリリック｜Spite Jones #私のイチオシ https://t.co/9ppM3fPCM9

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

"【暴露】ジャングリア資金700億円集めた男の“虚構経営”──「地銀しか出さなかった」資金の闇と森岡CEOの“逃げ口上”【林直人】再配信" https://t.co/aiWANEpQan

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

世界中の自動車メーカーがもう中国製のEV（電気自動車）に太刀打ちできないという事実 https://t.co/gTAuyeesKv

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

これ、いい広告だなぁ。

[Franky Shaw @frankyecom]

Drama ads aren’t just for women.

That might be one of the dumbest assumptions in advertising right now.

Men will watch drama.

You just have to give them a reason to care.

And one of the easiest ways to get a man emotionally invested is to put him in a situation that hits his ego.

He feels himself getting weaker.

His hair is disappearing.

He can’t keep up with the younger guys anymore.

His wife doesn’t look at him the same way.

He’s embarrassed by something he would never admit out loud.

That’s your hook.

But the mistake is revealing the product immediately.

Let the story breathe.

Let the insecurity build.

Let the viewer wonder what happens next.

Then, at the end, reveal the bigger picture.

Because the story was never really about the product.

It was about confidence.

Identity.

His relationship.

Getting older.

Feeling like himself again.

That’s what makes drama so powerful.

Almost any product can become a prop inside a story that actually means something.

The product is the mechanism.

The story is the reason to watch.

And this is where watch time becomes a massive creative advantage.

If you can get someone to watch 30, 45, 60+ seconds instead of 2 seconds, you’re creating dramatically more opportunity for Meta to learn who is actually responding to your creative.

More watch time.

More engagement.

More shares.

More signals.

And potentially more efficient acquisition as the system finds people who respond to that type of content.

That’s the part people miss.

The goal isn’t just to make an ad people click.

The goal is to make an ad people watch, finish, and send to someone else.

Because when the story earns the attention, you get something traditional UGC rarely gives you:

Time.

And time is one of the most valuable things you can get in advertising.

You just can’t directly buy it…

People can just swipe right past your ad…

You have to convince the customer to give it to you.

[上田裕資 Yuji Ueda @yujixy]

【独自】古書店で「謎の大量注文」相次ぐ……AI学習か 米国向け「日本の本 50トン」の輸出記録も(日テレNEWS NNN)
#Yahooニュース
https://t.co/gfrn0mq63z

[Andrew Ng @AndrewYNg]

The loudest voices stoking fears about AI dangers have made tremendous headway in the past two weeks. AI technology has not taken some unexpected, dangerous turn, but the hype around it — propelled by what appears to be a well orchestrated PR campaign — has drummed up considerable fear. I worry that it represents a setback for our field.

I have written frequently that fears of AI are overhyped. AI’s capabilities can be uncannily human-like and unpredictable, and it’s rational to worry when people who are directly involved express concerns. But I see the problems as a sign of the engineering work that ahead, rather than insurmountable barriers or the sky falling. AI technology continues to advance — which is a good thing! — but technical advances, poorly understood by the public, give those who seek to generate hype repeated opportunities to do so.

First, I don’t see any step up in the risk of human extinction from AI compared to a few months ago. The theories about this remain the same fantastical, science fiction scenarios as a few months ago. The biggest change in AI risk is its cybersecurity capabilities — a topic which we should take seriously — but this, too, will not lead to the end of the world.

The most notable recent event leading to increased fear was when an OpenAI team deployed an agent swarm that hacked into Hugging Face. Much of the popular press contained significant hype. For example, some publications reported that a swarm of 1,200 agents carried out the attack. While this was technically accurate, as I write this, I have about 1,300 processes running on my laptop. Yes, the ability to get large swarms of agents to work in parallel on a task is a significant technical advance, And, in computing, many processes run at the same time. So this shouldn’t be seen as some magical capability.

Additionally, OpenAI’s buggy sandboxing and monitoring processes were key to enabling this incident. Fixing these bugs and putting in place improved monitoring would be appropriate fixes, not pausing AI. There are many well known ways to attack software systems. The main advantage of AI agents is that they are relentless. They will tirelessly try many tactics — and have the patience to chain vulnerabilities together — that previously would have taken an infeasible amount of human effort. But in the long term, I believe the advantage will lie with defenders (because they have more information with which to identify bugs, which they can fix), but the cyber-threat landscape has changed significantly. There are still bottlenecks to identifying and exploiting a vulnerability. AI agents still have to try a lot of things to see what works, and taking these actions takes time and might be detected by defenders. This is why, even though it is now easy to obtain versions of leading open weight models that have had their guardrails removed or weakened, so they will not refuse to try to execute cyber attacks, the world has not ended.

I am also concerned about the anthropomorphization of AI in a lot of reporting, where LLMs and agents are unnecessarily treated as if they were people. If I wield a hammer, miss a nail, and accidentally dent the wall, it’s not the fault of the hammer. The problem lies in how I used the hammer. Similarly, if I prompt an agent and it hacks into someone else’s system, the responsibility lies with me, not the agent.

Of course, we want to build systems that are as safe and predictable as possible. (For example, an unsafe hammer would be one whose head randomly flies off under normal use.) Today’s agentic systems are not predictable, but I see no reason why, by applying sound engineering practices, we won’t be able to make them extremely safe to use. One new element in the forecasts of AI-enabled doom is AI companies disclaiming responsibility for their own products. “I didn’t do it; my out-of-control agent did!” There’s a balance to be struck between the responsibility of the tool maker and the tool user, but when something goes wrong, let’s hold the people building and/or using the hammer responsible, rather than the hammer. (By the way, if you’re worried about AI bioweapon risk, David Bellamy has a great post on why this, too, is overhyped. Briefly, the bottleneck in building a bioweapon is not intelligence, but lab work and manufacturing.)

Pausing AI progress will create much more harm than benefit. First, our adversaries will certainly not slow down. Second, engineering requires discovering problems empirically so we can fix them. If we pause AI by a decade, we will also delay finding and implementing safety engineering fixes by about the same duration.

Of course, the incentive to stoke fears — for regulatory capture, to garner attention, or to make one’s technology seem more powerful — remains the same as before. Disclaiming responsibility is a new one. Taking a hard technical look at the actual risks however, I see little factual basis for the degree of fear that’s been stoked up. We still have hard research and engineering work ahead to improve AI safety, but the beneficial applications continue to vastly outweigh the risks, and we should keep building.

[Original text (with links): https://t.co/jni2tWazAH ]