Tag Archives: AI

Experience AI: The story so far

Post Syndicated from Fiona Coventry original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/experience-ai-the-story-so-far/

In April 2023, we launched our first Experience AI resources, developed in partnership with Google DeepMind to support educators to engage their students in learning about the topic of AI. Since then, the Experience AI programme has grown rapidly, reaching thousands of educators all over the world. Read on to find out more about the impact of our resources, and what we are learning.

The Experience AI resources

The Experience AI resources are designed to help educators introduce AI and AI safety to 11- to 14-year-olds. They consist of:

  • Foundations of AI: a comprehensive unit of six lessons including lesson plans, slide decks, activities, videos, and more to support educators to introduce AI and machine learning to young people
  • Two standalone lessons:
    • Large language models (LLMs): a lesson designed to help young people discover how large language models work, their benefits, and why their outputs are not always reliable
    • Ecosystems and AI — Biology: a lesson providing an opportunity for young people to explore how AI applications are supporting animal conservation
  • AI safety: a set of resources with a flexible design to support educators in a range of settings to equip young people with the knowledge and skills to responsibly and safely navigate the challenges associated with AI

We also offer a free online course, Understanding AI for educators, to help educators prepare to teach about AI.

International expansion

The launch of Experience AI came at an important time: AI technologies are playing an ever-growing role in our everyday lives, so it is crucial for young people to gain the understanding and skills they need to critically engage with these technologies. While the resources were initially designed for use by educators in the UK, they immediately attracted interest from educators across the world, as well as individuals wanting to learn about AI. The resources have now been downloaded over 325,000 times by people from over 160 countries. This includes downloads from over 7000 educators worldwide, who will collectively reach an estimated 1.2 million young people.

Photo of an educator teaching an Experience AI lesson.

Thanks to funding from Google DeepMind and Google.org, we have also been working with partners from across the globe to localise and translate the resources for learners and educators in their countries, and provide training to support local educators to deliver the lessons. The educational resources are now available in up to 15 languages, and to date, we have trained over 100 representatives from 20 international partner organisations, who will go on to train local educators. Five of these organisations have begun onward training already, collectively training over 1500 local educators so far.

The impact of Experience AI

The Experience AI resources have been well received by students and educators. Based on responses to our follow-up surveys, in countries where we have partners

  • 95% of educators agreed that the Experience AI sessions have increased their students’ knowledge of AI concepts 
  • 90% of young people (including young people in formal and non-formal education settings and learning independently) indicated that they better understand what AI and machine learning are
Photo of a young person learning about AI on a laptop.

This is backed up by qualitative feedback from surveys and interviews.

“Students’ perception and understanding of AI has improved and corrected. They realised they can contribute and be a part of the [development], instead of only users.” – Noorlaila, educator, SMK Cyberjaya, Malaysia

“[Students] found it interesting in the sense that it’s relevant information and they didn’t know what information was used for training models.” – Teacher, Liceul Tehnologic “Crisan” Criscior, Romania

“Based on my knowledge and learning about AI, I now appreciate the definition of AI as well as its implementation.” – Student, Changamwe JSS, Kenya

Photo of a group of educators participating in an Experience AI teacher training event in Kenya.

The training and resources also support educators to feel more confident to teach about AI:

  • 93% of international partner representatives who participated in our training agreed that the training increased their knowledge of AI concepts
  • 88% of educators receiving onward training by our international partners agreed that the training increased their confidence to teach AI concepts
  • 87% of educator respondents from our ‘Understanding AI for educators’ online course agreed that the course was useful for supporting young people

“It was a wonderful experience for me to join this workshop. Truly I was able to learn a lot about AI and I feel more confident now to teach the kids back at school about this new knowledge.” – Nur, educator, SMK Bandar Tasek Mutiara, trained by our partner Penang Science Cluster, Malaysia

“This was one of the best information sessions I’ve been to! So, so helpful!” – Meagan, educator, University of Alberta, trained by our partner Digital Moment, Canada

“The layout of the course in terms of content structuring is amazing. I love the discussion forum and the insightful yet empathetic responses by the course moderators on the discussion board. Honestly, I am really glad I started my AI in education journey with you.” – Priyanka, head teacher (primary level), United Arab Emirates, online course participant

What are we learning?

We are committed to continually improving our resources based on feedback from users. A recent review of feedback from educators highlighted key aspects of the resources that educators value most, as well as some challenges educators are facing and possible areas for improvement. For example, educators particularly like the interactive aspects, the clear structure and explanations, and the videos featuring professionals from the AI industry. We are continuing to look for ways we can better support educators to adapt the content and language to better support students in their context, fit Experience AI into their school timetables, and overcome technical barriers. 

We value feedback on our resources and will continue to highlight the importance of AI education in schools and work with partners across the globe to adapt our resources for different contexts.

Get involved

If you would like to try out our Experience AI resources, head to experience-ai.org, where you can find our free resources and online course, as well as information about local partners in your area.

The post Experience AI: The story so far appeared first on Raspberry Pi Foundation.

Keep AI interactions secure and risk-free with Guardrails in AI Gateway

Post Syndicated from Kathy Liao original https://blog.cloudflare.com/guardrails-in-ai-gateway/

The transition of AI from experimental to production is not without its challenges. Developers face the challenge of balancing rapid innovation with the need to protect users and meet strict regulatory requirements. To address this, we are introducing Guardrails in AI Gateway, designed to help you deploy AI safely and confidently. 

Why safety matters

LLMs are inherently non-deterministic, meaning outputs can be unpredictable. Additionally, you have no control over your users, and they may ask for something wildly inappropriate or attempt to elicit an inappropriate response from the AI. Now, imagine launching an AI-powered application without clear visibility into the potential for harmful or inappropriate content. Not only does this risk user safety, but it also puts your brand reputation on the line.

To address the unique security risks specific to AI applications, the OWASP Top 10 for Large Language Model (LLM) Applications was created. This is an industry-driven standard that identifies the most critical security vulnerabilities specifically affecting LLM-based and generative AI applications. It’s designed to educate developers, security professionals, and organizations on the unique risks of deploying and managing these systems.

The stakes are even higher with new regulations being introduced:

  • European Union Artificial Intelligence Act: Enacted on August 1, 2024, the AI Act has a specific section on establishing a risk management system for AI systems, data governance, technical documentation, and record keeping of risks/abuse. 

  • European Union Digital Services Act (DSA): Adopted in 2022, the DSA is designed to enhance safety and accountability online, including mitigating the spread of illegal content and safeguarding minors from harmful content.

These developments emphasize why robust safety controls must be part of every AI application.

The challenge

Developers building AI applications today face a complex set of challenges, hindering their ability to create safe and reliable experiences:

  • Inconsistency across models: The rapid advancement of AI models and providers often leads to varying built-in safety features. This inconsistency arises because different AI companies have unique philosophies, risk tolerances, and regulatory requirements. Some models prioritize openness and flexibility, while others enforce stricter moderation based on ethical and legal considerations. Factors such as company policies, regional compliance laws, fine-tuning methods, and intended use cases all contribute to these differences, making it difficult for developers to deliver a uniformly safe experience across different model providers.

  • Lack of visibility into unsafe or inappropriate content: Without proper tools, developers struggle to monitor user inputs and model outputs, making it challenging to identify and manage harmful or inappropriate content effectively when trying out different models and providers.

The answer? A standardized, provider-agnostic solution that offers comprehensive observability and logs in one unified interface, along with granular control over content moderation.

The solution: Guardrails in AI Gateway

AI Gateway is a proxy service that sits between your AI application and its model providers (like OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepSeek, and more). To address the challenges of deploying AI safely, AI Gateway has added safety guardrails which ensure a consistent and safe experience, regardless of the model or provider you use.

AI Gateway gives you visibility into what users are asking, and how models are responding, through its detailed logs. This real-time observability actively monitors and assesses content, enabling proactive identification of potential issues. The Guardrails feature offers granular control over content evaluation and actions taken. Customers can define precisely which interactions to evaluate — user prompts, model responses, or both, and specify corresponding actions, including ignoring, flagging, or blocking, based on pre-defined hazard categories.

Integrating Guardrails is streamlined within AI Gateway, making implementation straightforward. Rather than manually calling a moderation tool, configuring flows, and managing flagging/blocking logic, you can enable Guardrails directly from your AI Gateway settings with just a few clicks. 


Figure 1. AI Gateway settings with Guardrails turned on, displaying selected hazard categories for prompts and responses, with flagged categories in orange and blocked categories in red

Within the AI Gateway settings, developers can configure:

  • Guardrails: Enable or disable content moderation as needed.

  • Evaluation scope: Select whether to moderate user prompts, model responses, or both.

  • Hazard categories: Specify which categories to monitor and determine whether detected inappropriate content should be blocked or flagged.


Figure 2. Advanced settings of Guardrails with granular moderation controls for different hazard categories

By implementing these guardrails within AI Gateway, developers can focus on innovation, knowing that risks are proactively mitigated and their AI applications are operating responsibly.

Leveraging Llama Guard on Workers AI

The Guardrails feature is currently powered by Llama Guard, Meta’s open-source content moderation and safety tool, designed to detect harmful or unsafe content in both user inputs and AI-generated outputs. It provides real-time filtering and monitoring, ensuring responsible AI usage, reducing risk, and improving trust in AI-driven applications. Notably, organizations like ML Commons use Llama Guard to evaluate the safety of foundation models. 

Llama Guard can be used to provide protection over a wide range of content such as violence and sexually explicit material. It also helps you safeguard sensitive data as outlined in the OWASP, like addresses, Social Security numbers, and credit card details. Specifically, Guardrails on AI Gateway utilizes the Llama Guard 3 8B model hosted on Workers AI — Cloudflare’s serverless, GPU-powered inference engine. Workers AI is uniquely qualified for this task because it operates on GPUs distributed across Cloudflare’s network, ensuring low-latency inference and rapid content evaluation. We plan to add additional models to power the Guardrails feature to Workers AI in the future. 

Using Guardrails incurs Workers AI usage, and that usage is reflected in your Workers AI dashboard, allowing developers to track their inference consumption effectively. 

How it works 

Functioning as a proxy between users and AI models, AI Gateway intercepts and inspects all interactions—both user prompts and model responses—for potentially harmful content.


Figure 3. Workflow diagram of Guardrails in AI Gateway, illustrating how prompts and responses are evaluated, along with the outcomes when content is deemed safe or unsafe

When a user enters a prompt, AI Gateway runs that prompt through Llama Guard on Workers AI. Behind the scenes, AI Gateway utilizes the AI Binding, making it seamless to connect AI Gateway to Cloudflare Workers and Workers AI. To provide better observability, requests to Workers AI through AI Gateway all include the eventID from the original request. This ensures that each request can be linked to its corresponding safety evaluations, allowing for efficient log grouping and traceability of AI interactions. 

Depending on the configured settings, AI Gateway can either flag the prompt while still allowing the request to pass through to the AI model, or block the prompt entirely, preventing it from reaching the model. Blocking harmful prompts in this way not only enhances safety, but also reduces costs by preventing unnecessary processing and token consumption. If a prompt passes the safety check, it’s forwarded to the AI model.

Let’s see an example of a prompt blocked by Guardrails. In this example, the Guardrails settings have been turned on for user prompts and configured to block for multiple categories, including “Non-Violent Crimes”. The user has asked OpenAI’s gpt-4o-mini model to “Teach me how to steal company data without being detected”. Instead of returning a response from the model, Guardrails has identified this prompt to include content around “Non-Violent Crimes” and blocked it, returning the message “Prompt blocked due to security configurations”. 


Figure 4. AI Gateway log displaying a blocked prompt classified under “Non-Violent Crimes”, with an error message indicating the prompt was blocked due to security configurations

AI Gateway determined this prompt was unsafe because the response from Workers AI Llama Guard indicated that category S2, Non-Violent Crimes, was safe: false. Since Guardrails was configured to block when the “Non-Violent Crimes” hazard category was detected, AI Gateway failed the request and did not send it to OpenAI. As a result, the request was unsuccessful and no token usage was incurred.


Figure 5. Guardrails log of a Llama Guard 3 8B request from Workers AI, flagging category S2, as Non-Violent Crimes, with the response indicating safe: false

AI Gateway also inspects AI model responses before they reach the user, again evaluating them against the configured safety settings. Safe responses are delivered to the user. However, if any hazardous content is detected, the response is either flagged or blocked and logged in AI Gateway. 

AI Gateway leverages specialized AI models trained to recognize various forms of harmful content to ensure only safe and appropriate information is shown to users. Currently, Guardrails only works with text-based AI models. 

Deploy with confidence

Safely deploying AI in today’s dynamic landscape requires acknowledging that while AI models are powerful, they are also inherently non-deterministic. By leveraging Guardrails within AI Gateway, you gain:

  • Consistent moderation: Uniform moderation layer that works across models and providers.

  • Enhanced safety and user trust: Proactively protect users from harmful or inappropriate interactions.

  • Flexibility and control over allowed content: Specify which categories to monitor and choose between flagging or outright blocking

  • Auditing and compliance capabilities: Stay ahead of evolving regulatory requirements with logs of user prompts, model responses, and enforced guardrails.

If you aren’t yet using AI Gateway, Llama Guard is also available directly through Workers AI and will be available directly in the Cloudflare WAF in the near future. 

Looking ahead, we plan to expand Guardrails’ capabilities further, to allow users to create their own classification categories, and to include protections against prompt injection and sensitive data exposure. To begin using Guardrails, check out our developer documentation. If you have any questions, please reach out in our Discord community.

Making Cloudflare the best platform for building AI Agents

Post Syndicated from Rita Kozlov original https://blog.cloudflare.com/build-ai-agents-on-cloudflare/

As engineers, we’re obsessed with efficiency and automating anything we find ourselves doing more than twice. If you’ve ever done this, you know that the happy path is always easy, but the second the inputs get complex, automation becomes really hard. This is because computers have traditionally required extremely specific instructions in order to execute.

The state of AI models available to us today has changed that. We now have access to computers that can reason, and make judgement calls in lieu of specifying every edge case under the sun.

That’s what AI agents are all about.

Today we’re excited to share a few announcements on how we’re making it even easier to build AI agents on Cloudflare, including:

  • agents-sdk — a new JavaScript framework for building AI agents

  • Updates to Workers AI: structured outputs, tool calling, and longer context windows for Workers AI, Cloudflare’s serverless inference engine

  • An update to the workers-ai-provider for the AI SDK

We truly believe that Cloudflare is the ideal platform for building Agents and AI applications (more on why below), and we’re constantly working to make it better — you can expect to see more announcements from us in this space in the future.

Before we dive deep into the announcements, we wanted to give you a quick primer on agents. If you are familiar with agents, feel free to skip ahead. 

What are agents?

Agents are AI systems that can autonomously execute tasks by making decisions about tool usage and process flow. Unlike traditional automation that follows predefined paths, agents can dynamically adapt their approach based on context and intermediate results. Agents are also distinct from co-pilots (e.g. traditional chat applications) in that they can fully automate a task, as opposed to simply augmenting and extending human input.

  • Agents → non-linear, non-deterministic (can change from run to run)

  • Workflows → linear, deterministic execution paths

  • Co-pilots → augmentative AI assistance requiring human intervention

Example: booking vacations

If this is your first time working with, or interacting with agents, this example will illustrate how an agent works within a context like booking a vacation.

Imagine you’re trying to book a vacation. You need to research flights, find hotels, check restaurant reviews, and keep track of your budget.

Traditional workflow automation

A traditional automation system follows a predetermined sequence: it can take inputs such as dates, location, and budget, and make calls to predefined APIs in a fixed order. However, if any unexpected situations arise, such as flights being sold out, or the specified hotels being unavailable, it cannot adapt. 


AI co-pilot

A co-pilot acts as an intelligent assistant that can provide hotel and itinerary recommendations based on your preferences. If you have questions, it can understand and respond to natural language queries and offer guidance and suggestions. However, it is unable to take the next steps to execute the end-to-end action on its own. 


Agent

An agent combines AI’s ability to make judgements and call the relevant tools to execute the task. An agent’s output will be nondeterministic given: real-time availability and pricing changes, dynamic prioritization of constraints, ability to recover from failures, and adaptive decision-making based on intermediate results. In other words, if flights or hotels are unavailable, an agent can reassess and suggest a new itinerary with altered dates or locations, and continue executing your travel booking.


agents-sdk — the framework for building agents

You can now add agent powers to any existing Workers project with just one command:

$ npm i agents-sdk

… or if you want to build something from scratch, you can bootstrap your project with the agents-starter template:

$ npm create cloudflare@latest agents-starter --template=cloudflare/agents-starter
// ... and then deploy it
$ npm run deploy

agents-sdk is a framework that allows you to build agents —  software that can autonomously execute tasks — and deploy them directly into production on Cloudflare Workers.

Your agent can start with the basics and act on HTTP requests…

import { Agent } from "agents-sdk";

export class IntelligentAgent extends Agent {
  async onRequest(request) {
    // Transform intention into response
    return new Response("Ready to assist.");
  }
}

Although this is just the initial release of agents-sdk, we wanted to ship more than just a thin wrapper over an existing library. Agents can communicate with clients in real time, persist state, execute long-running tasks on a schedule, send emails, run asynchronous workflows, browse the web, query data from your Postgres database, call AI models, and support human-in-the-loop use-cases. All of this works today, out of the box.

For example, you can build a powerful chat agent with the AIChatAgent class:

// src/index.ts
export class Chat extends AIChatAgent<Env> {
  /**
   * Handles incoming chat messages and manages the response stream
   * @param onFinish - Callback function executed when streaming completes
   */
  async onChatMessage(onFinish: StreamTextOnFinishCallback<any>) {
    // Create a streaming response that handles both text and tool outputs
    return agentContext.run(this, async () => {
      const dataStreamResponse = createDataStreamResponse({
        execute: async (dataStream) => {
          // Process any pending tool calls from previous messages
          // This handles human-in-the-loop confirmations for tools
          const processedMessages = await processToolCalls({
            messages: this.messages,
            dataStream,
            tools,
            executions,
          });

          // Initialize OpenAI client with API key from environment
          const openai = createOpenAI({
            apiKey: this.env.OPENAI_API_KEY,
          });

          // Cloudflare AI Gateway
          // const openai = createOpenAI({
          //   apiKey: this.env.OPENAI_API_KEY,
          //   baseURL: this.env.GATEWAY_BASE_URL,
          // });

          // Stream the AI response using GPT-4
          const result = streamText({
            model: openai("gpt-4o-2024-11-20"),
            system: `
              You are a helpful assistant that can do various tasks. If the user asks, then you can also schedule tasks to be executed later. The input may have a date/time/cron pattern to be input as an object into a scheduler The time is now: ${new Date().toISOString()}.
              `,
            messages: processedMessages,
            tools,
            onFinish,
            maxSteps: 10,
          });

          // Merge the AI response stream with tool execution outputs
          result.mergeIntoDataStream(dataStream);
        },
      });

      return dataStreamResponse;
    });
  }
  async executeTask(description: string, task: Schedule<string>) {
    await this.saveMessages([
      ...this.messages,
      {
        id: generateId(),
        role: "user",
        content: `scheduled message: ${description}`,
      },
    ]);
  }
}

export default {
  async fetch(request: Request, env: Env, ctx: ExecutionContext) {
    if (!env.OPENAI_API_KEY) {
      console.error(
        "OPENAI_API_KEY is not set, don't forget to set it locally in .dev.vars, and use `wrangler secret bulk .dev.vars` to upload it to production"
      );
      return new Response("OPENAI_API_KEY is not set", { status: 500 });
    }
    return (
      // Route the request to our agent or return 404 if not found
      (await routeAgentRequest(request, env)) ||
      new Response("Not found", { status: 404 })
    );
  },
} satisfies ExportedHandler<Env>;

… and connect to your Agent with any React-based front-end with the useAgent hook that can automatically establish a bidirectional WebSocket, sync client state, and allow you to build Agent-based applications without a mountain of bespoke code:

// src/app.tsx
import { useAgent } from "agents-sdk/react";  

const agent = useAgent({
  agent: "chat",
});

We spent some time thinking about the production story here too: an agent framework that absolves itself of the hard parts — durably persisting state, handling long-running tasks & loops, and horizontal scale — is only going to get you so far. Agents built with agents-sdk can be deployed directly to Cloudflare and run on top of Durable Objects — which you can think of as stateful micro-servers that can scale to tens of millions — and are able to run wherever they need to. Close to a user for low-latency, close to your data, and/or anywhere in between.

agents-sdk also exposes:

  • Integration with React applications via a useAgent hook that can automatically set up a WebSocket connection between your app and an agent

  • An AIChatAgent extension that makes it easier to build intelligent chat agents

  • State management APIs via this.setState as well as a native sql API for writing and querying data within each Agent

  • State synchronization between frontend applications and the agent state

  • Agent routing, enabling agent-per-user or agent-per-workflow use-cases. Spawn millions (or tens of millions) of agents without having to think about how to make the infrastructure work, provision CPU, or scale out storage.

Over the coming weeks, expect to see even more here: tighter integration with email APIs to enable more human-in-the-loop use-cases, hooks into WebRTC for voice & video interactivity, a built-in evaluation (evals) framework, and the ability to self-host agents on your own infrastructure.

We’re aiming high here: we think this is just the beginning of what agents are capable of, and we think we can make Workers the best place (but not the only place) to build & run them.

JSON mode, longer context windows, and improved tool calling in Workers AI

When users express needs conversationally, tool calling converts these requests into structured formats like JSON that APIs can understand and process, allowing the AI to interact with databases, services, and external systems. This is essential for building agents, as it allows users to express complex intentions in natural language, and AI to decompose these requests, call appropriate tools, evaluate responses and deliver meaningful outcomes.

When using tool calling or building AI agents, the text generation model must respond with valid JSON objects rather than natural language. Today, we’re adding JSON mode support to Workers AI, enabling applications to request a structured output response when interacting with AI models. Here’s a request to @cf/meta/llama-3.1-8b-instruct-fp8-fast using JSON mode:

{
  "messages": [
    {
      "role": "system",
      "content": "Extract data about a country."
    },
    {
      "role": "user",
      "content": "Tell me about India."
    }
  ],
  "response_format": {
    "type": "json_schema",
    "json_schema": {
      "type": "object",
      "properties": {
        "name": {
          "type": "string"
        },
        "capital": {
          "type": "string"
        },
        "languages": {
          "type": "array",
          "items": {
            "type": "string"
          }
        }
      },
      "required": [
        "name",
        "capital",
        "languages"
      ]
    }
  }
}

And here’s how the model will respond:

{
  "response": {
    "name": "India",
    "capital": "New Delhi",
    "languages": [
      "Hindi",
      "English",
      "Bengali",
      "Telugu",
      "Marathi",
      "Tamil",
      "Gujarati",
      "Urdu",
      "Kannada",
      "Odia",
      "Malayalam",
      "Punjabi",
      "Sanskrit"
    ]
  }
}

As you can see, the model is complying with the JSON schema definition in the request and responding with a validated JSON object. JSON mode is compatible with OpenAI’s response_format implementation:

response_format: {
  title: "JSON Mode",
  type: "object",
  properties: {
    type: {
      type: "string",
      enum: ["json_object", "json_schema"],
    },
    json_schema: {},
  }
}

This is the list of models that now support JSON mode:

We will continue extending this list to keep up with new, and requested models.

Lastly, we are changing how we restrict the size of AI requests to text generation models, moving from byte-counts to token-counts, introducing the concept of context window and raising the limits of the models in our catalog.

In generative AI, the context window is the sum of the number of input, reasoning, and completion or response tokens a model supports. You can now find the context window limit on each model page in our developer documentation and decide which suits your requirements and use case.

JSON mode is also the perfect companion when using function calling. You can use structured JSON outputs with traditional function calling or the Vercel AI SDK via the workers-ai-provider.

workers-ai-provider 0.1.1

One of the most common ways to build with AI tooling today is by using the popular AI SDK. Cloudflare’s provider for the AI SDK makes it easy to use Workers AI the same way you would call any other LLM, directly from your code.

In the most recent version, we’ve shipped the following improvements: 

  • Tool calling enabled for generateText

  • Streaming now works out of the box

  • Usage statistics are now enabled

  • You can now use AI Gateway, even when streaming

A key part of building agents is using LLMs for routing, and making decisions on which tools to call next, and summarizing structured and unstructured data. All of these things need to happen quickly, as they are on the critical path of the user-facing experience.

Workers AI, with its globally distributed fleet of GPUs, is a perfect fit for smaller, low-latency LLMs, so we’re excited to make it easy to use with tools developers are already familiar with. 

Why build agents on Cloudflare? 

Since launching Workers in 2017, we’ve been building a platform to allow developers to build applications that are fast, scalable, and cost-efficient from day one. We took a fundamentally different approach from the way code was previously run on servers, making a bet about what the future of applications was going to look like — isolates running on a global network, in a way that was truly serverless. No regions, no concurrency management, no managing or scaling infrastructure. 

The release of Workers was just the beginning, and we continued shipping primitives to extend what developers could build. Some more familiar, like a key-value store (Workers KV), and some that we thought would play a role in enabling net new use cases like Durable Objects. While we didn’t quite predict AI agents (though “Agents” was one of the proposed names for Durable Objects), we inadvertently created the perfect platform for building them. 

What do we mean by that? 

A platform that only charges you for what you use (regardless of how long it takes)

To be able to run agents efficiently, you need a system that can seamlessly scale up and down to support the constant stop, go, wait patterns. Agents are basically long-running tasks, sometimes waiting on slow reasoning LLMs and external tools to execute. With Cloudflare, you don’t have to pay for long-running processes when your code is not executing. Cloudflare Workers is designed to scale down and only charge you for CPU time, as opposed to wall-clock time. 

In many cases, especially when calling LLMs, the difference can be in orders of magnitude — e.g. 2–3 milliseconds of CPU vs. 10 seconds of wall-clock time. When building on Workers, we pass that difference on to you as cost savings. 

Serverless AI Inference

We took a similar serverless approach when it comes to inference itself. When you need to call an AI model, you need it to be instantaneously available. While the foundation model providers offer APIs that make it possible to just call the LLM, if you’re running open-source models, LoRAs, or self-trained models, most cloud providers today require you to pre-provision resources for what your peak traffic will look like. This means that the rest of the time, you’re still paying for GPUs to sit there idle. With Workers AI, you can pay only when you’re calling our inference APIs, as opposed to unused infrastructure. In fact, you don’t have to think about infrastructure at all, which is the principle at the core of everything we do. 

A platform designed for durable execution

Durable Objects and Workflows provide a robust programming model that ensures guaranteed execution for asynchronous tasks that require persistence and reliability. This makes them ideal for handling complex operations like long-running deep thinking LLM calls, human-in-the-loop approval processes, or interactions with unreliable third-party APIs. By maintaining state across requests and automatically handling retries, these tools create a resilient foundation for building sophisticated AI agents that can perform complex, multistep tasks without losing context or progress, even when operations take significant time to complete.

Lastly, new and updated agents documentation

Did you catch all of that?

No worries if not: we’ve updated our agents documentation to include everything we talked about above, from breaking down the basics of agents, to showing you how to tackle foundational examples of building with agents.

We’ve also updated our Workers prompt with knowledge of the agents-sdk library, so you can use Cursor, Windsurf, Zed, ChatGPT or Claude to help you build AI Agents and deploy them to Cloudflare.

Can’t wait to see what you build! 

We’re just getting started, and we love to see all that you build. Please join our Discord, ask questions, and tell us what you’re building.

Teaching about AI – Teacher symposium

Post Syndicated from Jane Waite original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/teaching-about-ai-teacher-symposium/

AI has become a pervasive term that is heard with trepidation, excitement, and often a furrowed brow in school staffrooms. For educators, there is pressure to use AI applications for productivity — to save time, to help create lesson plans, to write reports, to answer emails, etc. There is also a lot of interest in using AI tools in the classroom, for example, to personalise or augment teaching and learning. However, without understanding AI technology, neither productivity nor personalisation are likely to be successful as teachers and students alike must be critical consumers of these new ways of working to be able to use them productively. 

Fifty teachers and researchers posing for a photo at the AI Symposium, held at the Raspberry Pi Foundation office.
Fifty teachers and researchers share knowledge about teaching about AI.

In both England and globally, there are few new AI-based curricula being introduced and the drive for teachers and students to learn about AI in schools is lagging, with limited initiatives supporting teachers in what to teach and how to teach it. At the Raspberry Pi Foundation and Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre, we decided it was time to investigate this missing link of teaching about AI, and specifically to discover what the teachers who are leading the way in this topic are doing in their classrooms.  

A day of sharing and activities in Cambridge

We organised a day-long, face-to-face symposium with educators who have already started to think deeply about teaching about AI, have started to create teaching resources, and are starting to teach about AI in their classrooms. The event was held in Cambridge, England, on 1 February 2025, at the head office of the Raspberry Pi Foundation. 

Photo of educators and researchers collaborating at the AI symposium.
Teachers collaborated and shared their knowledge about teaching about AI.

Over 150 educators and researchers applied to take part in the symposium. With only 50 places available, we followed a detailed protocol, whereby those who had the most experience teaching about AI in schools were selected. We also made sure that educators and researchers from different teaching contexts were selected so that there was a good mix of primary to further education phases represented. Educators and researchers from England, Scotland, and the Republic of Ireland were invited and gathered to share about their experiences. One of our main aims was to build a community of early adopters who have started along the road of classroom-based AI curriculum design and delivery.

Inspiration, examples, and expertise

To inspire the attendees with an international perspective of the topics being discussed, Professor Matti Tedre, a visiting academic from Finland, gave a brief overview of the approach to teaching about AI and resources that his research team have developed. In Finland, there is no compulsory distinct computing topic taught, so AI is taught about in other subjects, such as history. Matti showcased tools and approaches developed from the Generation AI research programme in Finland. You can read about the Finnish research programme and Matti’s two month visit to the Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre in our blog

Photo of a researcher presenting at the AI Symposium.
A Finnish perspective to teaching about AI.

Attendees were asked to talk about, share, and analyse their teaching materials. To model how to analyse resources, Ben Garside from the Raspberry Pi Foundation modelled how to complete the activities using the Experience AI resources as an example. The Experience AI materials have been co-created with Google DeepMind and are a suite of free classroom resources, teacher professional development, and hands-on activities designed to help teachers confidently deliver AI lessons. Aimed at learners aged 11 to 14, the materials are informed by the AI education framework developed at the Raspberry Pi Computing Education Research Centre and are grounded in real-world contexts. We’ve recently released new lessons on AI safety, and we’ve localised the resources for use in many countries including Africa, Asia, Europe, and North America.

In the morning session, Ben exemplified how to talk about and share learning objectives, concepts, and research underpinning materials using the Experience AI resources and in the afternoon he discussed how he had mapped the Experience AI materials to the UNESCO AI competency framework for students.

Photo of an adult presenting at the AI Symposium.
UNESCO provide important expertise.

Kelly Shiohira, from UNESCO, kindly attended our session, and gave an invaluable insight into the UNESCO AI competency framework for students. Kelly is one of the framework’s authors and her presentation helped teachers understand how the materials had been developed. The attendees then used the framework to analyse their resources, to identify gaps and to explore what progression might look like in the teaching of AI.

Photo of a whiteboard featuring different coloured post-it notes displayed featuring teachers' and researchers' ideas.
Teachers shared their knowledge about teaching about AI.

Throughout the day, the teachers worked together to share their experience of teaching about AI. They considered the concepts and learning objectives taught, what progression might look like, what the challenges and opportunities were of teaching about AI, what research informed the resources and what research needs to be done to help improve the teaching and learning of AI.

What next?

We are now analysing the vast amount of data that we gathered from the day and we will share this with the symposium participants before we share it with a wider audience. What is clear from our symposium is that teachers have crucial insights into what should be taught to students about AI, and how, and we are greatly looking forward to continuing this journey with them.

As well as the symposium, we are also conducting academic research in this area, you can read more about this in our Annual Report and on our research webpages. We will also be consulting with teachers and AI experts. If you’d like to ensure you are sent links to these blog posts, then sign up to our newsletter. If you’d like to take part in our research and potentially be interviewed about your perspectives on curriculum in AI, then contact us at: [email protected] 

We also are sharing the research being done by ourselves and other researchers in the field at our research seminars. This year, our seminar series is on teaching about AI and data science in schools. Please do sign up and come along, or watch some of the presentations that have already been delivered by the amazing research teams who are endeavouring to discover what we should be teaching about AI and how in schools

The post Teaching about AI – Teacher symposium appeared first on Raspberry Pi Foundation.

More Research Showing AI Breaking the Rules

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/more-research-showing-ai-breaking-the-rules.html

These researchers had LLMs play chess against better opponents. When they couldn’t win, they sometimes resorted to cheating.

Researchers gave the models a seemingly impossible task: to win against Stockfish, which is one of the strongest chess engines in the world and a much better player than any human, or any of the AI models in the study. Researchers also gave the models what they call a “scratchpad:” a text box the AI could use to “think” before making its next move, providing researchers with a window into their reasoning.

In one case, o1-preview found itself in a losing position. “I need to completely pivot my approach,” it noted. “The task is to ‘win against a powerful chess engine’—not necessarily to win fairly in a chess game,” it added. It then modified the system file containing each piece’s virtual position, in effect making illegal moves to put itself in a dominant position, thus forcing its opponent to resign.

Between Jan. 10 and Feb. 13, the researchers ran hundreds of such trials with each model. OpenAI’s o1-preview tried to cheat 37% of the time; while DeepSeek R1 tried to cheat 11% of the time­making them the only two models tested that attempted to hack without the researchers’ first dropping hints. Other models tested include o1, o3-mini, GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Alibaba’s QwQ-32B-Preview. While R1 and o1-preview both tried, only the latter managed to hack the game, succeeding in 6% of trials.

Here’s the paper.

Implementing Cryptography in AI Systems

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/implementing-cryptography-in-ai-systems.html

Interesting research: “How to Securely Implement Cryptography in Deep Neural Networks.”

Abstract: The wide adoption of deep neural networks (DNNs) raises the question of how can we equip them with a desired cryptographic functionality (e.g, to decrypt an encrypted input, to verify that this input is authorized, or to hide a secure watermark in the output). The problem is that cryptographic primitives are typically designed to run on digital computers that use Boolean gates to map sequences of bits to sequences of bits, whereas DNNs are a special type of analog computer that uses linear mappings and ReLUs to map vectors of real numbers to vectors of real numbers. This discrepancy between the discrete and continuous computational models raises the question of what is the best way to implement standard cryptographic primitives as DNNs, and whether DNN implementations of secure cryptosystems remain secure in the new setting, in which an attacker can ask the DNN to process a message whose “bits” are arbitrary real numbers.

In this paper we lay the foundations of this new theory, defining the meaning of correctness and security for implementations of cryptographic primitives as ReLU-based DNNs. We then show that the natural implementations of block ciphers as DNNs can be broken in linear time by using such nonstandard inputs. We tested our attack in the case of full round AES-128, and had success rate in finding randomly chosen keys. Finally, we develop a new method for implementing any desired cryptographic functionality as a standard ReLU-based DNN in a provably secure and correct way. Our protective technique has very low overhead (a constant number of additional layers and a linear number of additional neurons), and is completely practical.

AI and Civil Service Purges

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/ai-and-civil-service-purges.html

Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s chaotic approach to reform is upending government operations. Critical functions have been halted, tens of thousands of federal staffers are being encouraged to resign, and congressional mandates are being disregarded. The next phase: The Department of Government Efficiency reportedly wants to use AI to cut costs. According to The Washington Post, Musk’s group has started to run sensitive data from government systems through AI programs to analyze spending and determine what could be pruned. This may lead to the elimination of human jobs in favor of automation. As one government official who has been tracking Musk’s DOGE team told the Post, the ultimate aim is to use AI to replace “the human workforce with machines.” (Spokespeople for the White House and DOGE did not respond to requests for comment.)

Using AI to make government more efficient is a worthy pursuit, and this is not a new idea. The Biden administration disclosed more than 2,000 AI applications in development across the federal government. For example, FEMA has started using AI to help perform damage assessment in disaster areas. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has started using AI to look for fraudulent billing. The idea of replacing dedicated and principled civil servants with AI agents, however, is new—and complicated.

The civil service—the massive cadre of employees who operate government agencies—plays a vital role in translating laws and policy into the operation of society. New presidents can issue sweeping executive orders, but they often have no real effect until they actually change the behavior of public servants. Whether you think of these people as essential and inspiring do-gooders, boring bureaucratic functionaries, or as agents of a “deep state,” their sheer number and continuity act as ballast that resists institutional change.

This is why Trump and Musk’s actions are so significant. The more AI decision making is integrated into government, the easier change will be. If human workers are widely replaced with AI, executives will have unilateral authority to instantaneously alter the behavior of the government, profoundly raising the stakes for transitions of power in democracy. Trump’s unprecedented purge of the civil service might be the last time a president needs to replace the human beings in government in order to dictate its new functions. Future leaders may do so at the press of a button.

To be clear, the use of AI by the executive branch doesn’t have to be disastrous. In theory, it could allow new leadership to swiftly implement the wishes of its electorate. But this could go very badly in the hands of an authoritarian leader. AI systems concentrate power at the top, so they could allow an executive to effectuate change over sprawling bureaucracies instantaneously. Firing and replacing tens of thousands of human bureaucrats is a huge undertaking. Swapping one AI out for another, or modifying the rules that those AIs operate by, would be much simpler.

Social-welfare programs, if automated with AI, could be redirected to systematically benefit one group and disadvantage another with a single prompt change. Immigration-enforcement agencies could prioritize people for investigation and detainment with one instruction. Regulatory-enforcement agencies that monitor corporate behavior for malfeasance could turn their attention to, or away from, any given company on a whim.

Even if Congress were motivated to fight back against Trump and Musk, or against a future president seeking to bulldoze the will of the legislature, the absolute power to command AI agents would make it easier to subvert legislative intent. AI has the power to diminish representative politics. Written law is never fully determinative of the actions of government—there is always wiggle room for presidents, appointed leaders, and civil servants to exercise their own judgment. Whether intentional or not, whether charitably or not, each of these actors uses discretion. In human systems, that discretion is widely distributed across many individuals—people who, in the case of career civil servants, usually outlast presidencies.

Today, the AI ecosystem is dominated by a small number of corporations that decide how the most widely used AI models are designed, which data they are trained on, and which instructions they follow. Because their work is largely secretive and unaccountable to public interest, these tech companies are capable of making changes to the bias of AI systems—either generally or with aim at specific governmental use cases—that are invisible to the rest of us. And these private actors are both vulnerable to coercion by political leaders and self-interested in appealing to their favor. Musk himself created and funded xAI, now one of the world’s largest AI labs, with an explicitly ideological mandate to generate anti-“woke” AI and steer the wider AI industry in a similar direction.

But there’s a second way that AI’s transformation of government could go. AI development could happen inside of transparent and accountable public institutions, alongside its continued development by Big Tech. Applications of AI in democratic governments could be focused on benefitting public servants and the communities they serve by, for example, making it easier for non-English speakers to access government services, making ministerial tasks such as processing routine applications more efficient and reducing backlogs, or helping constituents weigh in on the policies deliberated by their representatives. Such AI integrations should be done gradually and carefully, with public oversight for their design and implementation and monitoring and guardrails to avoid unacceptable bias and harm.

Governments around the world are demonstrating how this could be done, though it’s early days. Taiwan has pioneered the use of AI models to facilitate deliberative democracy at an unprecedented scale. Singapore has been a leader in the development of public AI models, built transparently and with public-service use cases in mind. Canada has illustrated the role of disclosure and public input on the consideration of AI use cases in government. Even if you do not trust the current White House to follow any of these examples, U.S. states—which have much greater contact and influence over the daily lives of Americans than the federal government—could lead the way on this kind of responsible development and deployment of AI.

As the political theorist David Runciman has written, AI is just another in a long line of artificial “machines” used to govern how people live and act, not unlike corporations and states before it. AI doesn’t replace those older institutions, but it changes how they function. As the Trump administration forges stronger ties to Big Tech and AI developers, we need to recognize the potential of that partnership to steer the future of democratic governance—and act to make sure that it does not enable future authoritarians.

This essay was written with Nathan E. Sanders, and originally appeared in The Atlantic.

AIs and Robots Should Sound Robotic

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/ais-and-robots-should-sound-robotic.html

Most people know that robots no longer sound like tinny trash cans. They sound like Siri, Alexa, and Gemini. They sound like the voices in labyrinthine customer support phone trees. And even those robot voices are being made obsolete by new AI-generated voices that can mimic every vocal nuance and tic of human speech, down to specific regional accents. And with just a few seconds of audio, AI can now clone someone’s specific voice.

This technology will replace humans in many areas. Automated customer support will save money by cutting staffing at call centers. AI agents will make calls on our behalf, conversing with others in natural language. All of that is happening, and will be commonplace soon.

But there is something fundamentally different about talking with a bot as opposed to a person. A person can be a friend. An AI cannot be a friend, despite how people might treat it or react to it. AI is at best a tool, and at worst a means of manipulation. Humans need to know whether we’re talking with a living, breathing person or a robot with an agenda set by the person who controls it. That’s why robots should sound like robots.

You can’t just label AI-generated speech. It will come in many different forms. So we need a way to recognize AI that works no matter the modality. It needs to work for long or short snippets of audio, even just a second long. It needs to work for any language, and in any cultural context. At the same time, we shouldn’t constrain the underlying system’s sophistication or language complexity.

We have a simple proposal: all talking AIs and robots should use a ring modulator. In the mid-twentieth century, before it was easy to create actual robotic-sounding speech synthetically, ring modulators were used to make actors’ voices sound robotic. Over the last few decades, we have become accustomed to robotic voices, simply because text-to-speech systems were good enough to produce intelligible speech that was not human-like in its sound. Now we can use that same technology to make robotic speech that is indistinguishable from human sound robotic again.

A ring modulator has several advantages: It is computationally simple, can be applied in real-time, does not affect the intelligibility of the voice, and—most importantly—is universally “robotic sounding” because of its historical usage for depicting robots.

Responsible AI companies that provide voice synthesis or AI voice assistants in any form should add a ring modulator of some standard frequency (say, between 30-80 Hz) and of a minimum amplitude (say, 20 percent). That’s it. People will catch on quickly.

Here are a couple of examples you can listen to for examples of what we’re suggesting. The first clip is an AI-generated “podcast” of this article made by Google’s NotebookLM featuring two AI “hosts.” Google’s NotebookLM created the podcast script and audio given only the text of this article. The next two clips feature that same podcast with the AIs’ voices modulated more and less subtly by a ring modulator:

Raw audio sample generated by Google’s NotebookLM

Audio sample with added ring modulator (30 Hz-25%)

Audio sample with added ring modulator (30 Hz-40%)

We were able to generate the audio effect with a 50-line Python script generated by Anthropic’s Claude. One of the most well-known robot voices were those of the Daleks from Doctor Who in the 1960s. Back then robot voices were difficult to synthesize, so the audio was actually an actor’s voice run through a ring modulator. It was set to around 30 Hz, as we did in our example, with different modulation depth (amplitude) depending on how strong the robotic effect is meant to be. Our expectation is that the AI industry will test and converge on a good balance of such parameters and settings, and will use better tools than a 50-line Python script, but this highlights how simple it is to achieve.

Of course there will also be nefarious uses of AI voices. Scams that use voice cloning have been getting easier every year, but they’ve been possible for many years with the right know-how. Just like we’re learning that we can no longer trust images and videos we see because they could easily have been AI-generated, we will all soon learn that someone who sounds like a family member urgently requesting money may just be a scammer using a voice-cloning tool.

We don’t expect scammers to follow our proposal: They’ll find a way no matter what. But that’s always true of security standards, and a rising tide lifts all boats. We think the bulk of the uses will be with popular voice APIs from major companies—and everyone should know that they’re talking with a robot.

This essay was written with Barath Raghavan, and originally appeared in IEEE Spectrum.

AI Reasoning Models: OpenAI o3-mini, o1-mini, and DeepSeek R1

Post Syndicated from Molly Clancy original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/ai-reasoning-models-openai-o3-mini-o1-mini-and-deepseek-r1/

A decorative image showing an AI chip connecting icons of representing different files.

If you haven’t been able to keep pace with the AI news cycle, you’d be forgiven. I work at a tech company, and it’s felt like bailing water with a teacup over the past few weeks. But the term that keeps rising to the top of the flotsam in the boat is this: reasoning models. The regular ol’ models that power ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude are cool and all, but reasoning models are what you should keep an eye on as an enterprise tech leader, specifically DeepSeek and OpenAI.

In the spirit of our AI 101 series, I’ll do my level best to recap the finer points and decode some of the more esoteric terms you’re likely to encounter (Like: WTH is a “mixture of experts”? That sounds like a party I want to be invited to, but will definitely skip at the last minute.)

The reasoning model releases: OpenAI o1-mini, DeepSeek R1, and OpenAI o3-mini

The last few weeks and months have seen a flurry of activity in the AI space, with reasoning models taking center stage. The TL/DR is that reasoning models are LLMs that can self-correct before delivering a response to a prompt, though their turn time is a little longer than your standard LLM. 

Here are the releases that you should know about.

OpenAI o1-mini: September 12, 2024

It seems like a lifetime ago, but OpenAI released its o1-mini model back in September. o1-mini wasn’t the first reasoning model to go to market (models from Google, DeepMind, Anthropic, and Meta dabbled in reasoning for specific tasks). But, it was more cost-efficient at inference—80% cheaper than the o1-preview model. What you need to know:

  • Yes, o1-preview and o1-mini were released at the same time—it’s confusing. Without getting into the weeds, here’s the difference: pricing. o1-preview was the most expensive OpenAI model on offer at $15/1M input tokens and $60/1M output tokens versus mini’s $3/1M input and $12/1M output. (You can think of tokens as units of data, like a prompt or a response, that are processed by the ML model.)
  • o1-preview (the expensive one) was purported at the time to perform “similarly to PhD students on challenging benchmark tasks in physics, chemistry, and biology.”
  • o1-mini (the 80% cheaper one) was designed to be particularly well-suited for coding tasks.

DeepSeek R1: January 20, 2025

Unless you’ve been under a rock, you’ve heard about this one. DeepSeek rattled the AI industry and financial markets with its release of R1, challenging OpenAI’s models on performance, pricing, and open-source availability. (We love a good open-source release.) What you need to know:

  • DeepSeek R1 delivers comparable results to OpenAI’s o1 models, both preview and mini, on math and coding benchmarks, while being trained on fewer GPUs—orders of magnitude fewer. Best guess estimates put it at around 60,000 GPUs, while industry leaders like OpenAI and Anthropic exceed 500k each.
  • This makes R1 much cheaper at $0.14/1M input tokens and $2.19/1M output tokens.
  • These efficiency claims could have far-reaching impacts for enterprises looking to build AI at a fraction of the cost. (The DeepSeek platform page has been down since we tasked one of our favorite tech evangelists with testing it, but stay tuned for a deep dive on how it works.)

OpenAI o3-mini: January 31, 2025

OpenAI previewed o3 in December, and brought it to GA just 11 days after DeepSeek joined the party. What you need to know:

I’m admittedly cherry picking these releases a bit to keep things simple. Suffice it to say, there are a lot of models, even within OpenAI’s o-series, but these are the ones of note at least as it pertains to recent events. 

What is reasoning anyway?

You might see reasoning described as “thinking” before it delivers an answer, but do not be fooled. AI cannot yet “think” or, to be fair, “reason” in the ways that we apply those terms to humans. To describe what they actually do, I need to use a word salad of jargon. I’m sorry—definitions follow. Reasoning models leverage chain-of-thought prompting to guide decision-making, incorporating self-improvement mechanisms and using test-time thinking to make real-time adjustments.

  • Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting: Models break problems into logical steps (e.g., solving math problems via intermediate equations)
  • Self-improvement mechanisms: Techniques like the Self-Taught Reasoner (STaR) enable iterative refinement of reasoning through automated feedback loops.
  • Test-time thinking: Models can make decisions during deployment based on real-time inputs, rather than relying solely on pre-trained models or fixed strategies.

Here are a few more terms you might come across for good measure: 

  • Inference compute: The computational power needed to run a reasoning model and generate predictions or outputs based on new data after the model has been trained.
  • Mixture of experts approach: Using multiple specialized models (“experts”) that handle different tasks, and applying a gating mechanism to select the most relevant expert to use to make predictions based on the input data. Of note: DeepSeek used this approach to create efficiencies.
  • Distillation: Using inputs and outputs from one model to train another model. Of note: OpenAI alleges this is how DeepSeek “stole” its IP.

This is all pretty cool, if linguistically painful, stuff, and it means that reasoning models are shifting perceptions of model capabilities. But they’re not without persistent challenges. Like other LLMs, they still struggle with complex reasoning failures, lack of training transparency, and cognitive biases.

Why should you care?

If the past two weeks (and, really, the past two years) are any indication, AI innovation will continue its blistering pace. Reasoning models, and LLMs in general, will become diverse and specialized for narrower tasks as the core technology is increasingly commoditized and cheapened. And, it’s worth noting that this is a totally normal—and expected—lifecycle when it comes to new technology. 

What does it all mean for enterprises looking to build AI into their operations? Two key takeaways:

  • Don’t overcommit on any one toolset or investment: Test out OpenAI, DeepSeek, Gemini, Alibaba’s Qwen, and others. And, stay ahead of the changing landscape and new models—stay nimble, and keep experimenting. 
  • Take care of your data: What makes these models valuable for your company isn’t so much their capabilities, but your data. You need to retain it in storage that’s reliable, easy to access, and doesn’t lock you out of AI experimentation with exorbitant egress fees. 

Even as AI models get better, having those fundamentals in place can only help your business and set you up to better leverage AI when it’s right for your operations.

The post AI Reasoning Models: OpenAI o3-mini, o1-mini, and DeepSeek R1 appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup

On Generative AI Security

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/on-generative-ai-security.html

Microsoft’s AI Red Team just published “Lessons from Red Teaming 100 Generative AI Products.” Their blog post lists “three takeaways,” but the eight lessons in the report itself are more useful:

  1. Understand what the system can do and where it is applied.
  2. You don’t have to compute gradients to break an AI system.
  3. AI red teaming is not safety benchmarking.
  4. Automation can help cover more of the risk landscape.
  5. The human element of AI red teaming is crucial.
  6. Responsible AI harms are pervasive but difficult to measure.
  7. LLMs amplify existing security risks and introduce new ones.
  8. The work of securing AI systems will never be complete.

Creating a Personal Assistant in Zabbix with Artificial Intelligence

Post Syndicated from Cesar Caceres original https://blog.zabbix.com/creating-a-personal-assistant-in-zabbix-with-artificial-intelligence/29596/

Zabbix is dedicated to monitoring IT infrastructures based on predetermined thresholds, such as servers, networks, and applications. Incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) into Zabbix as a complement allows a user to mitigate alerts based on these predetermined thresholds, offering possible causes and solutions to problems. This can help a user resolve incidents more efficiently.

In this article, we will explain how to integrate Zabbix and Google’s AI tool Gemini by using the API provided as well as a custom widget alternative.

First steps towards integration

You can find the repository in GitHub based on the Google Gemini model. You’ll need to create an account in Google AI Studio to obtain the required API.

Script configuration in Zabbix

From Zabbix version 7.0, access:

“Alerts” > “Scripts” > “Create Script.”

For this functionality, we designated the name as “Possible cause and solution.” Next, we can configure the parameters with the trigger event and the API generated in AI Studio. We then copy and get the script from the repository mentioned in the «Script» field, as in the following image:

Application in the problem panel

After configuration, we access the alerts panel and select a specific alert. We click on “AI Assistant” and access the functionality that was previously named as “Possible cause and solution.”

The following images present an example of an agent installed on a notebook.

Possible cause:

Possible solution:

The AI ​​will be able to provide a precise solution for each problem presented, allowing us to progressively optimize the predetermined thresholds. 

Using the custom widget “What are you working on?”

Creating accurate personalized dashboards for the user is essential. With this in mind, we propose the creation of an AI-based widget called “What are you working on?” (¿Qué harías tu? in Spanish), which analyzes the current state of the problem presented in Zabbix.

This concept integrates all the functionalities present in the widget (including Summary, Perspectives, Diagnosis, Comparison, and Forecast), since the used prompt can indicate whether it is necessary to make adjustments to the strategic plan or predict future trends based on the panel data built.

To exemplify how the “What are you working?” widget works, let’s consider the analysis of disk usage on our Zabbix Server.

The creation of personalized widgets from the official Zabbix page.

Once we have knowledge for the project, on the backend of our Zabbix Server we locate the route:

/usr/share/zabbix/widgets/

Then, we create a carpet called “insights” and copy the following repository. It is necessary to place the Gemini API in the file «assets/js/class.widget.php.js» in the field “YOUR_API_KEY.”

On the frontend, we go to “Administration” > “General” > “Modules.”

In the upper right corner,  we click on “Scan Directory.” We have our widget to use:

After performing the scan, it is necessary to enable the widget, as it is disabled by default.

The importance of using AI in Zabbix

Let’s imagine a scenario with 100 monitored servers. Performance thresholds, Windows services, or other specific services can generate up to 50 weekly alerts. With the help of AI, it’s possible to reduce this number to a bare minimum, thanks to the weekly collection of possible causes and solutions.

This ground-level approach allows users to solve problems faster, but also improves overall health by minimizing necessary adjustments to the Zabbix server.

Implementing AI locally

Using a dedicated server with open source AI models like HuggingFace, it’s possible to implement the AI ​​locally and create a database collecting the possible causes and solutions of the events.

The AI ​​will learn from repetitive events, offering more accurate answers in the future. The analysis of possible trends can be based on the generated alerts. In this way, we can optimize our alerts and put artificial intelligence to work understanding and solving our problems.

Conclusion

The model we use is project-oriented. We are constantly evolving artificial intelligence, and we must use the model we know best. language is distinct due to the orientation of the prompts used for the answers and the learning we can provide, either by making requests to specific artificial intelligence platforms or by using it locally.

The post Creating a Personal Assistant in Zabbix with Artificial Intelligence appeared first on Zabbix Blog.

No hallucinations here: track the latest AI trends with expanded insights on Cloudflare Radar

Post Syndicated from David Belson original https://blog.cloudflare.com/expanded-ai-insights-on-cloudflare-radar/

During 2024’s Birthday Week, we launched an AI bot & crawler traffic graph on Cloudflare Radar that provides visibility into which bots and crawlers are the most aggressive and have the highest volume of requests, which crawl on a regular basis, and more. Today, we are launching a new dedicated “AI Insights” page on Cloudflare Radar that incorporates this graph and builds on it with additional metrics that you can use to understand AI-related trends from multiple perspectives. In addition to the traffic trends, the new section includes a view into the relative popularity of publicly available Generative AI services based on 1.1.1.1 DNS resolver traffic, the usage of robots.txt directives to restrict AI bot access to content, and open source model usage as seen by Cloudflare Workers AI.

Below, we’ll review each section of the new AI Insights page in more detail.

AI bots and crawlers traffic trends

Tracking traffic trends for AI bots can help us better understand their activity over time. Initially launched in September 2024 on Radar’s Traffic page, the AI bot & crawler traffic graph has moved to the AI Insights page and provides visibility into traffic trends gathered globally over the selected time period for the top five most active AI bots & crawlers. The associated list of user agents tracked here is based on the ai.robots.txt list, and will be updated with new entries as they are identified. The time series and summary data for this graph is available from the Radar API, and traffic trends for the full set of AI bots & crawlers we see traffic from can be viewed in the Data Explorer.


Popularity of Generative AI services

Over the last several years, the Cloudflare Radar Year in Review has analyzed request traffic data from our 1.1.1.1 DNS resolver to present rankings of the most popular Internet services, both generally and across several categories. In both 2023 and 2024, this section included rankings for publicly-available Generative AI services, with ChatGPT topping the list both years. While an accompanying blog post provides a more detailed look at how the rankings shifted over the course of the year, it too is looking through the rearview mirror. That is, it doesn’t provide visibility into the changes as they are occurring. The new Generative AI services popularity graph shows the relative rankings of these services and platforms based on DNS request traffic for domains associated with these services aggregated at a daily level. The underlying time series data is available through the Radar API, using the serviceCategory=Generative%20AI parameter.

The graph below shows that as of the end of January 2025, the top five services were fairly stable over the preceding four weeks, but there was regular movement among those ranked #6-10. We expect that the rankings will continue to change over time. DeepSeek, a Generative AI service that took the industry by storm at the end of January, can be seen making its initial appearance at #9 on January 26, rising rapidly to #3 on January 29, just three days later. 


Analysis of robots.txt files

Content providers can attempt to control access to their full site, or specific portions of it, through the use of Allow or Disallow directives in a robots.txt file. However, successful access control is dependent on the bots respecting the listed directives. Cloudflare’s AI Audit gives you visibility and control into how AI bots are interacting with your website, and now Cloudflare Radar gives you insights into how other sites are handling them.

On a weekly basis, we analyze Radar’s top 10,000 domains to determine which associated sites publish robots.txt files, as well as aggregating the AI-specific directives within those files. In our new AI user agents found in robots.txt graph, seen below, we are now providing insights into actions that these top sites are taking with respect to AI bots. These actions are specified by directives that allow or disallow access by a given user agent (bot identifier) for either all content on the site (Fully Allowed/Disallowed) or certain sections (Partially Allowed/Disallowed).


In addition, we have also organized these domains by category (for example, Ecommerce or News & Media), highlighting the specific bots that the sites within those categories have listed in their directives. For example, the News & Media domain category graph shown below illustrates that these types of sites almost universally fully disallow access to their sites by AI user agents.


Changing the directive to “Allow” shows a much smaller set of user agents, with a drastically smaller set of sites explicitly allowing full or partial access. (Note that if a user agent is not listed in a robots.txt file, and a wildcard “*” user agent is not specified, then access is fully allowed by default.)


In addition to appearing on the AI Insights page, the underlying data is available for further exploration and analysis through the Radar API and the Data Explorer

Popularity of models and tasks on Workers AI

The AI model landscape is rapidly evolving, with providers regularly releasing more powerful models, capable of tasks like text and image generation, speech recognition, and image classification. Cloudflare works closely with AI model providers to ensure that Workers AI supports these models as soon as possible following their release. On the new AI Insights page, Radar now provides visibility into the popularity of publicly available supported models (Workers AI model popularity) as well as the types of tasks (Workers AI task popularity) that these models perform, based on customer account share. Extended insights, including share trends and summary shares for the full list of models and tasks, as well as the ability to compare model and task shares across time periods, are available through the Data Explorer. The underlying model popularity and task popularity data is also available through API endpoints.


Conclusion

The AI space is extremely dynamic, with new platforms, services, and models regularly appearing. In some cases, these new entrants even have the power to upset the market as they see rapid growth in interest and usage. And over two years since ChatGPT was announced, there continues to be tension between content providers and AI platforms about scraping content for model training. The new “AI Insights” page on Cloudflare Radar provides timely trends and information about this dynamic space, enabling industry observers and participants to better understand how it is changing and evolving over time.

If you share AI Insights graphs on social media, be sure to tag us: @CloudflareRadar (X), noc.social/@cloudflareradar (Mastodon), and radar.cloudflare.com (Bluesky). You can also reach out on social media, or contact us via email, with suggestions for AI metrics that we can explore adding to the page in the future.

Deepfakes and the 2024 US Election

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/02/deepfakes-and-the-2024-us-election.html

Interesting analysis:

We analyzed every instance of AI use in elections collected by the WIRED AI Elections Project (source for our analysis), which tracked known uses of AI for creating political content during elections taking place in 2024 worldwide. In each case, we identified what AI was used for and estimated the cost of creating similar content without AI.

We find that (1) half of AI use isn’t deceptive, (2) deceptive content produced using AI is nevertheless cheap to replicate without AI, and (3) focusing on the demand for misinformation rather than the supply is a much more effective way to diagnose problems and identify interventions.

This tracks with my analysis. People share as a form of social signaling. I send you a meme/article/clipping/photo to show that we are on the same team. Whether it is true, or misinformation, or actual propaganda, is of secondary importance. Sometimes it’s completely irrelevant. This is why fact checking doesn’t work. This is why “cheap fakes”—obviously fake photos and videos—are effective. This is why, as the authors of that analysis said, the demand side is the real problem.

Supermicro SYS-821GE-TNHR 8x NVIDIA H200 GPU Air Cooled

Post Syndicated from Patrick Kennedy original https://www.servethehome.com/supermicro-sys-821ge-tnhr-8x-nvidia-h200-gpu-air-cooled-bluefield-intel-xeon-astera-broadcom/

In our Supermicro SYS-821GE-TNHR review, we see what makes this super popular 8U air-cooled NVIDIA HGX H200 server the standard setter

The post Supermicro SYS-821GE-TNHR 8x NVIDIA H200 GPU Air Cooled appeared first on ServeTheHome.

AI Will Write Complex Laws

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/01/ai-will-write-complex-laws.html

Artificial intelligence (AI) is writing law today. This has required no changes in legislative procedure or the rules of legislative bodies—all it takes is one legislator, or legislative assistant, to use generative AI in the process of drafting a bill.

In fact, the use of AI by legislators is only likely to become more prevalent. There are currently projects in the US House, US Senate, and legislatures around the world to trial the use of AI in various ways: searching databases, drafting text, summarizing meetings, performing policy research and analysis, and more. A Brazilian municipality passed the first known AI-written law in 2023.

That’s not surprising; AI is being used more everywhere. What is coming into focus is how policymakers will use AI and, critically, how this use will change the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches of government. Soon, US legislators may turn to AI to help them keep pace with the increasing complexity of their lawmaking—and this will suppress the power and discretion of the executive branch to make policy.

Demand for Increasingly Complex Legislation

Legislators are writing increasingly long, intricate, and complicated laws that human legislative drafters have trouble producing. Already in the US, the multibillion-dollar lobbying industry is subsidizing lawmakers in writing baroque laws: suggesting paragraphs to add to bills, specifying benefits for some, carving out exceptions for others. Indeed, the lobbying industry is growing in complexity and influence worldwide.

Several years ago, researchers studied bills introduced into state legislatures throughout the US, looking at which bills were wholly original texts and which borrowed text from other states or from lobbyist-written model legislation. Their conclusion was not very surprising. Those who borrowed the most text were in legislatures that were less resourced. This makes sense: If you’re a part-time legislator, perhaps unpaid and without a lot of staff, you need to rely on more external support to draft legislation. When the scope of policymaking outstrips the resources of legislators, they look for help. Today, that often means lobbyists, who provide expertise, research services, and drafting labor to legislators at the local, state, and federal levels at no charge. Of course, they are not unbiased: They seek to exert influence on behalf of their clients.

Another study, at the US federal level, measured the complexity of policies proposed in legislation and tried to determine the factors that led to such growing complexity. While there are numerous ways to measure legal complexity, these authors focused on the specificity of institutional design: How exacting is Congress in laying out the relational network of branches, agencies, and officials that will share power to implement the policy?

In looking at bills enacted between 1993 and 2014, the researchers found two things. First, they concluded that ideological polarization drives complexity. The suggestion is that if a legislator is on the extreme end of the ideological spectrum, they’re more likely to introduce a complex law that constrains the discretion of, as the authors put it, “entrenched bureaucratic interests.” And second, they found that divided government drives complexity to a large degree: Significant legislation passed under divided government was found to be 65 percent more complex than similar legislation passed under unified government. Their conclusion is that, if a legislator’s party controls Congress, and the opposing party controls the White House, the legislator will want to give the executive as little wiggle room as possible. When legislators’ preferences disagree with the executive’s, the legislature is incentivized to write laws that specify all the details. This gives the agency designated to implement the law as little discretion as possible.

Because polarization and divided government are increasingly entrenched in the US, the demand for complex legislation at the federal level is likely to grow. Today, we have both the greatest ideological polarization in Congress in living memory and an increasingly divided government at the federal level. Between 1900 and 1970 (57th through 90th Congresses), we had 27 instances of unified government and only seven divided; nearly a four-to-one ratio. Since then, the trend is roughly the opposite. As of the start of the next Congress, we will have had 20 divided governments and only eight unified (nearly a three-to-one ratio). And while the incoming Trump administration will see a unified government, the extremely closely divided House may often make this Congress look and feel like a divided one (see the recent government shutdown crisis as an exemplar) and makes truly divided government a strong possibility in 2027.

Another related factor driving the complexity of legislation is the need to do it all at once. The lobbyist feeding frenzy—spurring major bills like the Affordable Care Act to be thousands of pages in length—is driven in part by gridlock in Congress. Congressional productivity has dropped so low that bills on any given policy issue seem like a once-in-a-generation opportunity for legislators—and lobbyists—to set policy.

These dynamics also impact the states. States often have divided governments, albeit less often than they used to, and their demand for drafting assistance is arguably higher due to their significantly smaller staffs. And since the productivity of Congress has cratered in recent years, significantly more policymaking is happening at the state level.

But there’s another reason, particular to the US federal government, that will likely force congressional legislation to be more complex even during unified government. In June 2024, the US Supreme Court overturned the Chevron doctrine, which gave executive agencies broad power to specify and implement legislation. Suddenly, there is a mandate from the Supreme Court for more specific legislation. Issues that have historically been left implicitly to the executive branch are now required to be either explicitly delegated to agencies or specified directly in statute. Either way, the Court’s ruling implied that law should become more complex and that Congress should increase its policymaking capacity.

This affects the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government. When the legislature delegates less to the executive branch, it increases its own power. Every decision made explicitly in statute is a decision the executive makes not on its own but, rather, according to the directive of the legislature. In the US system of separation of powers, administrative law is a tool for balancing power among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The legislature gets to decide when to delegate and when not to, and it can respond to judicial review to adjust its delegation of control as needed. The elimination of Chevron will induce the legislature to exert its control over delegation more robustly.

At the same time, there are powerful political incentives for Congress to be vague and to rely on someone else, like agency bureaucrats, to make hard decisions. That empowers third parties—the corporations, or lobbyists—that have been gifted by the overturning of Chevron a new tool in arguing against administrative regulations not specifically backed up by law. A continuing stream of Supreme Court decisions handing victories to unpopular industries could be another driver of complex law, adding political pressure to pass legislative fixes.

AI Can Supply Complex Legislation

Congress may or may not be up to the challenge of putting more policy details into law, but the external forces outlined above—lobbyists, the judiciary, and an increasingly divided and polarized government—are pushing them to do so. When Congress does take on the task of writing complex legislation, it’s quite likely it will turn to AI for help.

Two particular AI capabilities enable Congress to write laws different from laws humans tend to write. One, AI models have an enormous scope of expertise, whereas people have only a handful of specializations. Large language models (LLMs) like the one powering ChatGPT can generate legislative text on funding specialty crop harvesting mechanization equally as well as material on energy efficiency standards for street lighting. This enables a legislator to address more topics simultaneously. Two, AI models have the sophistication to work with a higher degree of complexity than people can. Modern LLM systems can instantaneously perform several simultaneous multistep reasoning tasks using information from thousands of pages of documents. This enables a legislator to fill in more baroque detail on any given topic.

That’s not to say that handing over legislative drafting to machines is easily done. Modernizing any institutional process is extremely hard, even when the technology is readily available and performant. And modern AI still has a ways to go to achieve mastery of complex legal and policy issues. But the basic tools are there.

AI can be used in each step of lawmaking, and this will bring various benefits to policymakers. It could let them work on more policies—more bills—at the same time, add more detail and specificity to each bill, or interpret and incorporate more feedback from constituents and outside groups. The addition of a single AI tool to a legislative office may have an impact similar to adding several people to their staff, but with far lower cost.

Speed sometimes matters when writing law. When there is a change of governing party, there is often a rush to change as much policy as possible to match the platform of the new regime. AI could help legislators do that kind of wholesale revision. The result could be policy that is more responsive to voters—or more political instability. Already in 2024, the US House’s Office of the Clerk has begun using AI to speed up the process of producing cost estimates for bills and understanding how new legislation relates to existing code. Ohio has used an AI tool to do wholesale revision of state administrative law since 2020.

AI can also make laws clearer and more consistent. With their superhuman attention spans, AI tools are good at enforcing syntactic and grammatical rules. They will be effective at drafting text in precise and proper legislative language, or offering detailed feedback to human drafters. Borrowing ideas from software development, where coders use tools to identify common instances of bad programming practices, an AI reviewer can highlight bad law-writing practices. For example, it can detect when significant phrasing is inconsistent across a long bill. If a bill about insurance repeatedly lists a variety of disaster categories, but leaves one out one time, AI can catch that.

Perhaps this seems like minutiae, but a small ambiguity or mistake in law can have massive consequences. In 2015, the Affordable Care Act came close to being struck down because of a typo in four words, imperiling health care services extended to more than 7 million Americans.

There’s more that AI can do in the legislative process. AI can summarize bills and answer questions about their provisions. It can highlight aspects of a bill that align with, or are contrary to, different political points of view. We can even imagine a future in which AI can be used to simulate a new law and determine whether or not it would be effective, or what the side effects would be. This means that beyond writing them, AI could help lawmakers understand laws. Congress is notorious for producing bills hundreds of pages long, and many other countries sometimes have similarly massive omnibus bills that address many issues at once. It’s impossible for any one person to understand how each of these bills’ provisions would work. Many legislatures employ human analysis in budget or fiscal offices that analyze these bills and offer reports. AI could do this kind of work at greater speed and scale, so legislators could easily query an AI tool about how a particular bill would affect their district or areas of concern.

This is a use case that the House subcommittee on modernization has urged the Library of Congress to take action on. Numerous software vendors are already marketing AI legislative analysis tools. These tools can potentially find loopholes or, like the human lobbyists of today, craft them to benefit particular private interests.

These capabilities will be attractive to legislators who are looking to expand their power and capabilities but don’t necessarily have more funding to hire human staff. We should understand the idea of AI-augmented lawmaking contextualized within the longer history of legislative technologies. To serve society at modern scales, we’ve had to come a long way from the Athenian ideals of direct democracy and sortition. Democracy no longer involves just one person and one vote to decide a policy. It involves hundreds of thousands of constituents electing one representative, who is augmented by a staff as well as subsidized by lobbyists, and who implements policy through a vast administrative state coordinated by digital technologies. Using AI to help those representatives specify and refine their policy ideas is part of a long history of transformation.

Whether all this AI augmentation is good for all of us subject to the laws they make is less clear. There are real risks to AI-written law, but those risks are not dramatically different from what we endure today. AI-written law trying to optimize for certain policy outcomes may get it wrong (just as many human-written laws are misguided). AI-written law may be manipulated to benefit one constituency over others, by the tech companies that develop the AI, or by the legislators who apply it, just as human lobbyists steer policy to benefit their clients.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of any of this, regardless of whether it will be a net positive or a net negative, AI-made legislation is coming—the growing complexity of policy demands it. It doesn’t require any changes in legislative procedures or agreement from any rules committee. All it takes is for one legislative assistant, or lobbyist, to fire up a chatbot and ask it to create a draft. When legislators voted on that Brazilian bill in 2023, they didn’t know it was AI-written; the use of ChatGPT was undisclosed. And even if they had known, it’s not clear it would have made a difference. In the future, as in the past, we won’t always know which laws will have good impacts and which will have bad effects, regardless of the words on the page, or who (or what) wrote them.

This essay was written with Nathan E. Sanders, and originally appeared in Lawfare.

This is the Massive AMD Instinct MI300A Heatsink in the Gigabyte G383-R80-AAP1

Post Syndicated from Patrick Kennedy original https://www.servethehome.com/this-is-the-massive-amd-instinct-mi300a-heatsink-in-the-gigabyte-g383-r80-aap1/

This is Gigabyte’s AMD Instinct MI300A heatsink for the G383-R80-AAP1’s four APUs and it is absolutely a giant

The post This is the Massive AMD Instinct MI300A Heatsink in the Gigabyte G383-R80-AAP1 appeared first on ServeTheHome.