The TechCrunch AI glossary | TechCrunch


Artificial intelligence is a deep and convoluted world. The scientists who work in this field often rely on jargon and lingo to explain what they’re working on. As a result, we frequently have to use those technical terms in our coverage of the artificial intelligence industry. That’s why we thought it would be helpful to put together a glossary with definitions of some of the most important words and phrases that we use in our articles.

We will regularly update this glossary to add new entries as researchers continually uncover novel methods to push the frontier of artificial intelligence while identifying emerging safety risks.


An AI agent refers to a tool that makes use of AI technologies to perform a series of tasks on your behalf — beyond what a more basic AI chatbot could do — such as filing expenses, booking tickets or a table at a restaurant, or even writing and maintaining code. However, as we’ve explained before, there are lots of moving pieces in this emergent space, so different people can mean different things when they refer to an AI agent. Infrastructure is also still being built out to deliver on envisaged capabilities. But the basic concept implies an autonomous system that may draw on multiple AI systems to carry out multi-step tasks.

Given a simple question, a human brain can answer without even thinking too much about it — things like “which animal is taller between a giraffe and a cat?” But in many cases, you often need a pen and paper to come up with the right answer because there are intermediary steps. For instance, if a farmer has chickens and cows, and together they have 40 heads and 120 legs, you might need to write down a simple equation to come up with the answer (20 chickens and 20 cows).

In an AI context, chain-of-thought reasoning for large language models means breaking down a problem into smaller, intermediate steps to improve the quality of the end result. It usually takes longer to get an answer, but the answer is more likely to be right, especially in a logic or coding context. So-called reasoning models are developed from traditional large language models and optimized for chain-of-thought thinking thanks to reinforcement learning.

(See: Large language model)

A subset of self-improving machine learning in which AI algorithms are designed with a multi-layered, artificial neural network (ANN) structure. This allows them to make more complex correlations compared to simpler machine learning-based systems, such as linear models or decision trees. The structure of deep learning algorithms draws inspiration from the interconnected pathways of neurons in the human brain.

Deep learning AIs are able to identify important characteristics in data themselves, rather than requiring human engineers to define these features. The structure also supports algorithms that can learn from errors and, through a process of repetition and adjustment, improve their own outputs. However, deep learning systems require a lot of data points to yield good results (millions or more). It also typically takes longer to train deep learning vs. simpler machine learning algorithms — so development costs tend to be higher.

(See: Neural network)

This means further training of an AI model that’s intended to optimize performance for a more specific task or area than was previously a focal point of its training — typically by feeding in new, specialized (i.e. task-oriented) data. 

Many AI startups are taking large language models as a starting point to build a commercial product but vying to amp up utility for a target sector or task by supplementing earlier training cycles with fine-tuning based on their own domain-specific knowledge and expertise.

(See: Large language model (LLM))

Large language models, or LLMs, are the AI models used by popular AI assistants, such as ChatGPT, Claude, Google’s Gemini, Meta’s AI Llama, Microsoft Copilot, or Mistral’s Le Chat. When you chat with an AI assistant, you interact with a large language model that processes your request directly or with the help of different available tools, such as web browsing or code interpreters.

AI assistants and LLMs can have different names. For instance, GPT is OpenAI’s large language model and ChatGPT is the AI assistant product.

LLMs are deep neural networks made of billions of numerical parameters (or weights, see below) that learn the relationships between words and phrases and create a representation of language, a sort of multidimensional map of words.

Those are created from encoding the patterns they find in billions of books, articles, and transcripts. When you prompt an LLM, the model generates the most likely pattern that fits the prompt. It then evaluates the most probable next word after the last one based on what was said before. Repeat, repeat, and repeat.

(See: Neural network)

Neural network refers to the multi-layered algorithmic structure that underpins deep learning — and, more broadly, the whole boom in generative AI tools following the emergence of large language models. 

Although the idea to take inspiration from the densely interconnected pathways of the human brain as a design structure for data processing algorithms dates all the way back to the 1940s, it was the much more recent rise of graphical processing hardware (GPUs) — via the video game industry — that really unlocked the power of theory. These chips proved well suited to training algorithms with many more layers than was possible in earlier epochs — enabling neural network-based AI systems to achieve far better performance across many domains, whether for voice recognition, autonomous navigation, or drug discovery.

(See: Large language model (LLM))

Weights are core to AI training as they determine how much importance (or weight) is given to different features (or input variables) in the data used for training the system — thereby shaping the AI model’s output. 

Put another way, weights are numerical parameters that define what’s most salient in a data set for the given training task. They achieve their function by applying multiplication to inputs. Model training typically begins with weights that are randomly assigned, but as the process unfolds, the weights adjust as the model seeks to arrive at an output that more closely matches the target.

For example, an AI model for predicting house prices that’s trained on historical real estate data for a target location could include weights for features such as the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, whether a property is detached, semi-detached, if it has or doesn’t have parking, a garage, and so on. 

Ultimately, the weights the model attaches to each of these inputs is a reflection of how much they influence the value of a property, based on the given data set.

OpenAI co-founder John Schulman has left Anthropic after less than a year


Less than a year into his tenure at the company, OpenAI co-founder John Schulman is leaving Anthropic. The startup confirmed Schulman’s departure after The Information, Reuters and other publications reported on the exit.

“We are sad to see John go but fully support his decision to pursue new opportunities and wish him all the very best,” said Jared Kaplan, Anthropic’s chief science officer, in a statement the company shared with Engadget. Schulman left OpenAI last August alongside Peter Deng, the company’s former vice-president of consumer product. Schulman is considered one of the original architects of ChatGPT.

Following his departure from OpenAI, Schulman said he was joining Anthropic to focus on AI alignment — the process of making machine learning models safe to use — and a desire to return “to more hands-on technical work.” Schulman hasn’t publicly said why he decided to leave Anthropic, nor what he plans to do next. His X profile still says he “recently joined” Anthropic.

If you buy something through a link in this article, we may earn commission.

DeepSeek vs. ChatGPT: Hands On With DeepSeek’s R1 Chatbot


The DeepSeek AI chatbot, released by a Chinese startup, has temporarily dethroned OpenAI’s ChatGPT from the top spot on Apple’s US App Store.

The app is completely free to use, and DeepSeek’s R1 model is powerful enough to be comparable to OpenAI’s o1 “reasoning” model, except DeepSeek’s chatbot is not sequestered behind a $20-a-month paywall like OpenAI’s is. Also, the DeepSeek model was efficiently trained using less powerful AI chips, making it a benchmark of innovative engineering.

I’ve tested many new generative AI tools over the past couple of years, so I was curious to see how DeepSeek compares to the ChatGPT app already on my smartphone. After a few hours of using it, my initial impressions are that DeepSeek’s R1 model will be a major disruptor for US-based AI companies, but it still suffers from the weaknesses common to other generative AI tools, like rampant hallucinations, invasive moderation, and questionably scraped material.

How to Access the DeepSeek Chatbot

Users interested in trying out DeepSeek can access the R1 model through the Chinese startup’s smartphone apps (Android, Apple), as well as on the company’s desktop website. You can also use the model through third-party services like Perplexity Pro. In the app or on the website, click on the DeepThink (R1) button to use the best model. Developers who want to experiment with the API can check out that platform online. It’s also possible to download a DeepSeek model to run locally on your computer.

In order to use all the consumer features, you will need to create a user account that tracks your chats. “We store the information we collect in secure servers located in the People’s Republic of China,” reads the company’s privacy policy. Check out this article from WIRED’s Security desk for a more detailed breakdown about what DeepSeek does with the data it collects. It’s worth keeping in mind that, just like ChatGPT and other American chatbots, you should always avoid sharing highly personal details or sensitive information during your interactions with a generative AI tool.

Is This Basically FreeGPT?

Yes and no! If you’re looking for a free chatbot to use, ChatGPT already includes plenty of free features. So does Anthropic’s Claude, Google’s Gemini, and Meta’s AI tool. So, why is the fact that DeepSeek is free notable? It’s about the raw power of the model that’s generating these free-for-now answers. As previously mentioned, DeepSeek’s R1 mimics OpenAI’s latest o1 model, without the $20-a-month subscription fee for the basic version and $200-a-month for the most capable model. This comes as a major blow to OpenAI’s attempt to monetize ChatGPT through subscriptions.

Another feature that’s similar to ChatGPT is the option to send the chatbot out into the web to gather links that inform its answers. DeepSeek does not have deals with publishers to use their content in answers; OpenAI does , including with WIRED’s parent company, Condé Nast. But the web search outputs were decent, and the links gathered by the bot were generally helpful.

Still, the current DeepSeek app does not have all the tools longtime ChatGPT users may be accustomed to, like the memory feature that recalls details from past conversations so you’re not always repeating yourself. DeepSeek also doesn’t have anything close to ChatGPT’s Advanced Voice Mode, which lets you have voice conversations with the chatbot, though the startup is working on more multimodal capabilities.

A Research Breakthrough, but Still Inaccurate

Though it may almost seem unfair to knock the DeepSeek chatbot for issues common across AI startups, it’s worth dwelling on how a breakthrough in model training efficiency does not even come close to solving the roadblock of hallucinations, where a chatbot just makes things up in its responses to prompts. Many of the outputs I generated included blatant falsehoods, confidently spewed out. For example, when I asked R1 what the model already knew about me without searching the web, the bot was convinced I’m a longtime tech reporter at The Verge. No shade, but not true!

DeepSeek vs. ChatGPT Hands On With DeepSeeks R1 Chatbot

Reece Rogers

A New Jam-Packed Biden Executive Order Tackles Cybersecurity, AI, and More


Four days before he leaves office, US president Joe Biden has issued a sweeping cybersecurity directive ordering improvements to the way the government monitors its networks, buys software, uses artificial intelligence, and punishes foreign hackers.

The 40-page executive order unveiled on Thursday is the Biden White House’s final attempt to kickstart efforts to harness the security benefits of AI, roll out digital identities for US citizens, and close gaps that have helped China, Russia, and other adversaries repeatedly penetrate US government systems.

The order “is designed to strengthen America’s digital foundations and also put the new administration and the country on a path to continued success,” Anne Neuberger, Biden’s deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology, told reporters on Wednesday.

Looming over Biden’s directive is the question of whether president-elect Donald Trump will continue any of these initiatives after he takes the oath of office on Monday. None of the highly technical projects decreed in the order are partisan, but Trump’s advisers may prefer different approaches (or timetables) to solving the problems that the order identifies.

Trump hasn’t named any of his top cyber officials, and Neuberger said the White House didn’t discuss the order with his transition staff, “but we are very happy to, as soon as the incoming cyber team is named, have any discussions during this final transition period.”

The core of the executive order is an array of mandates for protecting government networks based on lessons learned from recent major incidents—namely, the security failures of federal contractors.

The order requires software vendors to submit proof that they follow secure development practices, building on a mandate that debuted in 2022 in response to Biden’s first cyber executive order. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency would be tasked with double-checking these security attestations and working with vendors to fix any problems. To put some teeth behind the requirement, the White House’s Office of the National Cyber Director is “encouraged to refer attestations that fail validation to the Attorney General” for potential investigation and prosecution.

The order gives the Department of Commerce eight months to assess the most commonly used cyber practices in the business community and issue guidance based on them. Shortly thereafter, those practices would become mandatory for companies seeking to do business with the government. The directive also kicks off updates to the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s secure software development guidance.

Another part of the directive focuses on the protection of cloud platforms’ authentication keys, the compromise of which opened the door for China’s theft of government emails from Microsoft’s servers and its recent supply-chain hack of the Treasury Department. Commerce and the General Services Administration have 270 days to develop guidelines for key protection, which would then have to become requirements for cloud vendors within 60 days.

To protect federal agencies from attacks that rely on flaws in internet-of-things gadgets, the order sets a January 4, 2027, deadline for agencies to purchase only consumer IoT devices that carry the newly launched US Cyber Trust Mark label.

Automattic acquires WPAI, a startup that creates AI solutions for WordPress


WordPress hosting company Automattic said Monday that it is acquiring WPAI, a startup that builds AI solutions for WordPress, at an undisclosed price.

WPAI has some products such as CodeWP, a tool to use AI to create WP Plugins; AgentWP, an AI assistant for WordPress site builders; and WP Chat, which is an AI-powered chat for WordPress-related questions. WPAI noted on its blog that CodeWP and AgentWP will be discontinued in its current avatar and will be integrated within Automattic’s offering eventually.

Automattic noted that as part of the acquisition, the founding team will be joining the company to lead the efforts of AI features for WordPress.

“They’ll be working on testing, building, and integrating innovative AI solutions into the core ecosystem to redefine how users and developers work with WordPress,” Automattic said in an announcement.

Automattic’s CEO Matt Mullenweg also separately announced the acquisition on his personal blog.

On its blog, WPAI said that the company’s focus will be on creating applied AI solutions for the WordPress ecosystem.

“This includes developing AI standards for WordPress, improving the platform’s core functionality, and creating tools that help users build and manage better websites. We’ll work closely with the WordPress community to thoughtfully implement these improvements while maintaining open-source values.,” the company said.

Over the past few years, Automattic has already launched a few AI tools to help users write better and succinct posts. Post the new acquistion, the startup will possibly focus on creating AI-powered developer and site building tools.

WPAI acquisition is Automattic’s second acquisition in two months. Last month, the company snapped up a Grammarly competitor for developers called Harper, which checks grammar locally on the device.

Both Automattic and Mullenweg are involved in a legal battle with rival WordPress hosting site WP Engine. The latter has accused Mullenweg of anti-competitive behavior. On the other hand, Mullenweg and Automattic have argued that WP Engine infringed the “WordPress” trademark and didn’t contribute enough to the ecosystem. The judge in the case indicated last month that the court would pass some primary injunction. However, specifics of the order have to be ironed out.

Amazon reportedly bumped back its AI-powered Alexa to next year


If you’re wondering what happened to Amazon’s new and improved version of its Alexa voice assistant, you’re not alone. reports that the new Alexa is still stuck in its developmental phase and Amazon has cut off access to its beta phase including its new “Let’s Chat” phase. As a result, a planned late 2024 launch has been pushed back to next year.

The problem seems to be with its large language models (LLMs). The new Alexa is designed to from users but it’s also more likely to fail doing some of the most basic things the old version could do quite easily like create a timer or operate smart lights, according to a follow up report from .

Amazon originally planned to unveil its new version of Alexa AI in October but now the timeline has been extended into next year. (As you might have noticed, October has come and gone.) The original timeline planned to premiere the next evolutionary step in Alexa’s advancement on October 17 but Amazon decided to pivot and used the date to show off its new line of Kindle ereaders. Then in August, news surfaced that the new Alexa would be powered by and come with a monthly subscription fee.

As ChatGPT began to rise in popularity in the summer of 2023, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy wanted to see if Alexa could compete if it had an AI upgrade. Jassy reportedly started peppering Alexa with sports questions “like an ESPN reporter at a playoff press conference” and its answers were “nowhere near perfect.” It even made up a recent game score for Jassy.

Despite this, Alexa passed the good enough stage and Jassy and his fellow executives felt their engineers could build a beta version by the early part of 2024. Unfortunately, Amazon wasn’t able to meet its deadline.

Even with the new deadline, the new Alexa still has a long way to go to fix its problems. Some employees told Bloomberg that the problem outside of Alexa’s innerworkings is with Amazon’s overstuffed management and a lack of “a compelling vision for an AI-powered Alexa.” .

Apple’s own research sheds light on Siri’s AI laggardness


With the introduction of the new iPad Mini, Apple made it clear that a software experience brimming with AI is the way forward. And if that meant making the same kind of internal upgrades to a tablet that costs nearly half as much as its flagship phone, the company would still march forward.

However, its ambitions with Apple Intelligence lack competitive vigor, and even by Apple’s own standards, the experience hasn’t managed to wow users. On top of that, the staggered rollout of the most ambitious AI features — many of which are still in the future — has left enthusiasts with a bad taste.

Now, it appears that the reason behind the delays has something to do with quality and performance, as per Apple’s own testing. “The research found that OpenAI’s ChatGPT was 25% more accurate than Apple’s Siri, and able to answer 30% more questions,” says a Bloomberg report.

Updated interface of Siri activation.
Apple

To recall, Apple’s position with Siri is quite unique. For example, Siri is getting enhanced natural language understanding and deeper integration with apps as well as local files. However, there are tasks it can’t quite accomplish, and for such situations, the queries will be seamlessly offloaded to ChatGPT.

That’s part of a deal Apple inked with OpenAI. Now, it would make sense that Siri can’t quite pull the same kind of internet-connected tasks as ChatGPT, primarily because Siri and ChatGPT are two entirely different products. However, Apple is deploying OpenAI’s tech stack in more places than just Siri.

According to OpenAI, the ChatGPT will also lend a hand to users with “image and document understanding.” The Writing Tools – which have already arrived in tools like Notes and Safari — are also tapping into the ChatGPT kitty. Moreover, image generation will also be handled by OpenAI’s tech.

With such deep reliance on ChatGPT, one might think that’s because Apple isn’t quite there on the leaderboard with its own AI tech stack, something that could rival the likes of Google’s Gemini or Meta. That assumption won’t be entirely implausible, and even Apple’s team seems to agree with the status quo.

“In fact, some at Apple believe that its generative AI technology — at least, so far — is more than two years behind the industry leaders,” adds the Bloomberg report. Yet, it’s not merely about advancements, but also the pace of rollout.

Choice between Siri and Apple Intelligence
Siri will offload queries to ChatGPT for chores it can’t handle. Apple

Take a look at Galaxy AI, Samsung’s take on an AI ecosystem that has already appeared on a wide array of its phones and computing machines, with some help from Google’s Gemini stack. Chinese smartphone makers have already been offering generative AI features like image generation and a next-gen assistant for a while now.

At this point in time, it seems almost certain that Apple’s strategy with Apple Intelligence was hurried, apparently in a bid to quell investor concerns that the company was lagging in the AI race. So far, whatever little we have seen from Apple’s “AI revolution” has been far from revolutionary.

The best implementation of Apple Intelligence so far has been notification summaries and prioritization, but those are more utilitarian features than something that would reimagine the software experience for users. It would be interesting to see how Apple injects fresh energy into its AI approach next year.

But so far, the company hasn’t made any such announcements, and even the promises it made at its developers conference earlier this year are yet to materialize.






OpenAI reportedly plans to increase ChatGPT’s price to $44 within five years


OpenAI is reportedly telling investors that it plans on charging $22 a month to use ChatGPT by the end of the year. The company also plans to aggressively increase the monthly price over the next five years up to $44.

The documents obtained by shows that OpenAI took in $300 million in revenue this August, and expects to make $3.7 billion in sales by the end of the year. Various expenses such as salaries, rent and operational costs will cause the company to lose $5 billion this year.

OpenAI is reportedly circulating the documents the NYT reported on as part of a drive to find new investors to prevent or lessen its financial shortfall. Fortunately, OpenAI is raising money on a $150 billion valuation, and a new round of investments could bring in as much as $7 billion.

OpenAI is also reportedly in the midst of switching from . The business model allows for the removal of any caps on investor returns so they’ll have more room to negotiate for new investors at possibly higher rates.

I Stared Into the AI Void With the SocialAI App


The first time I used SocialAI, I was sure the app was performance art. That was the only logical explanation for why I would willingly sign up to have AI bots named Blaze Fury and Trollington Nefarious, well, troll me.

Even the app’s creator, Michael Sayman, admits that the premise of SocialAI may confuse people. His announcement this week of the app read a little like a generative AI joke: “A private social network where you receive millions of AI-generated comments offering feedback, advice, and reflections.”

But, no, SocialAI is real, if “real” applies to an online universe in which every single person you interact with is a bot.

There’s only one real human in the SocialAI equation. That person is you. The new iOS app is designed to let you post text like you would on Twitter or Threads. An ellipsis appears almost as soon as you do so, indicating that another person is loading up with ammunition, getting ready to fire back. Then, instantaneously, several comments appear, cascading below your post, each and every one of them written by an AI character. In the new new version of the app, just rolled out today, these AIs also talk to each other.

When you first sign up, you’re prompted to choose these AI character archetypes: Do you want to hear from Fans? Trolls? Skeptics? Odd-balls? Doomers? Visionaries? Nerds? Drama Queens? Liberals? Conservatives? Welcome to SocialAI, where Trollita Kafka, Vera D. Nothing, Sunshine Sparkle, Progressive Parker, Derek Dissent, and Professor Debaterson are here to prop you up or tell you why you’re wrong.

Mobile Phone Phone and Text

Screenshot of the instructions for setting up the Social AI app.

Is SocialAI appalling, an echo chamber taken to its logical extreme? Only if you ignore the truth of modern social media: Our feeds are already filled with bots, tuned by algorithms, and monetized with AI-driven ad systems. As real humans we do the feeding: freely supplying social apps fresh content, baiting trolls, buying stuff. In exchange, we’re amused, and occasionally feel a connection with friends and fans.

AI Chatbots Are Running for Office Now


Victor Miller [Archival audio clip]: She’s asking what policies are most important to you, VIC?

VIC [Archival audio clip]: The most important policies to me focus on transparency, economic development, and innovation.

Leah Feiger: That is so bizarre. I got to ask, could VIC be exposed to other sources of information other than these public records? Say, email from a conspiracy theorist who wants VIC to do something not so good with elections that would not represent its constituents.

Vittoria Elliott: Great question. I asked Miller, “Hey, you’ve built this bot on top of ChatGPT. We know that sometimes there’s problems or biases in the data that go into training these models. Are you concerned that VIC could imbibe some of those biases or there could be problems?” He said, “No, I trust OpenAI. I believe in their product.” You’re right. He decided, because of what’s important to him as someone who cares a lot about Cheyenne’s governance, to feed this bot hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of pages of what are called supporting documents. The kind of documents that people will submit in a city council meeting. Whether that’s a complaint, or an email, or a zoning issue, or whatever. He fed that to VIC. But you’re right, these chatbots can be trained on other material. He said that he actually asked VIC, “What if someone tries to spam you? What if someone tries to trick you? Send you emails and stuff.” VIC apparently responded to him saying, “I’m pretty confident I could differentiate what’s an actual constituent concern and what’s spam, or what’s not real.”

Leah Feiger: I guess I would just say to that, one-third of Americans right now don’t believe that President Joe Biden legitimately won the 2020 election, but I’m so glad this robot is very, very confident in its ability to decipher dis and misinformation here.

Vittoria Elliott: Totally.

Leah Feiger: That was VIC in Wyoming. Tell us a little more about AI Steve in the UK. How is it different from VIC?

Vittoria Elliott: For one thing, AI Steve is actually the candidate.

Leah Feiger: What do you mean actually the candidate?

Vittoria Elliott: He’s on the ballot.

Leah Feiger: Oh, OK. There’s no meat puppet?

Vittoria Elliott: There is a meat puppet, and that Steve Endicott. He’s a Brighton based business man. He describes himself as being the person who will attend Parliament, do the human things.

Leah Feiger: Sure.

Vittoria Elliott: But people, when they go to vote next month in the UK, they actually have the ability not to vote for Steve Endicott, but to vote for AI Steve.

Leah Feiger: That’s incredible. Oh my God. How does that work?

Vittoria Elliott: The way they described it to me, Steve Endicott and Jeremy Smith, who is the developer of AI Steve, the way they’ve described this is as a big catchment for community feedback. On the backend, what happens is people can talk to or call into AI Steve, can have apparently 10,000 simultaneous conversations at any given point. They can say, “I want to know when trash collection is going to be different.” Or, “I’m upset about fiscal policy,” or whatever. Those conversations get transcribed by the AI and distilled into these are the policy positions that constituents care about. But to make sure that people aren’t spamming it basically and trying to trick it, what they’re going to do is they’re going to have what they call validators. Brighton is about an hour outside of London, a lot of people commute between the two cities. They’ve said, “What we want to do is we want to have people who are on their commute, we’re going to ask them to sign up to these emails to be validators.” They’ll go through and say, “These are the policies that people say that are important to AI Steve. Do you, regular person who’s actually commuting, find that to actually be valuable to you?” Anything that gets more than 50% interest, or approval, or whatever, that’s the stuff that real Steve, who will be in Parliament, will be voting on. They have this second level of checks to make sure that whatever people are saying as feedback to the AI is checked by real humans. They’re trying to make it a little harder for them to game the system.