"David Durman, a nontheistic humanist, recently secured a religious exemption from using AI in the workplace," reports TechCrunch. Durman, a University of Kentucky administrator, told TechCrunch that humanism centers on "human well-being and flourishing, both individually and collectively ... and implores a person to try to improve both their well-being and their flourishing as well as the others around them." He believes that using the technology runs counter to his beliefs. "The way we become moral actors for ourselves and for others is through the active application of our minds, and the diminishing of that [through AI use] is going to necessarily have a negative impact on our ability to do so," he said, reflecting on how overreliance on AI might affect critical thinking...." [Humanism] tends to appeal to people who are skeptical of a god or other supernatural power yet still seek a scientific and moral framework to ground themselves in. [Alexandria Huiskens, staff attorney at the American Humanist Association, told TechCrunch] "Concern about AI and human dignity can run through several different faiths and traditions, whether that's Catholic teachings, or Universalism, or Humanism, and we want Humanists or nontheists to know that they fall into these categories — that they are also protected by the law at work...." In Durman's administrative role, in which he supports researchers applying for grants, he has not been required to use AI at work. Like many workers across fields, some of his colleagues and leadership have recommended that employees try out these tools, so he sought to secure his exemption now, in case the suggestion becomes a mandate in the future. "I hope that if [others] have similar feelings, that they feel encouraged to pursue some kind of resolution," Durman said. A University of Kentucky spokesperson told TechCrunch they "determined that an accommodation could be provided while allowing the employee to continue performing the essential functions of their position." (They added that "As technology and job responsibilities evolve, accommodations may be reviewed to ensure they remain reasonable and workable.")

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

CNBC reports: A month after President Donald Trump ordered that "super intelligence" replace the term artificial intelligence within executive branch departments and agencies, his leading tech allies, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, followed suit on earnings calls. Their fellow tech CEOs were less eager to do the same... SpaceX and Tesla adhered to Trump's wishes on earnings calls last week after Musk, earlier in October, changed the name of his rocket company's AI division to SpaceXSI. Speaking on Tesla's call about his work on humanoid robots, Musk said, "Some of them look very impressive, but they're not really using any kind of advanced AI or SI." Zuckerberg was equally compliant on Meta's earnings call on Oct. 21, emphasizing his company's "goal of delivering personal superintelligence to everyone." However, Meta was already using the term, having created a unit called Meta Superintelligence Labs last year.... [Some other tech CEOs are holding out.] Amazon CEO Andy Jassy peppered his call with use of "AI" on Thursday, uttering the abbreviation well over a dozen times in his introductory remarks. A day earlier, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said one of the company's three points of focus is "designing AI to empower people." And Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai was seconds into his quarterly earnings commentary when he said the search giant's "AI investments are driving increased usage and overall user growth...." Trump's preferred term is seeping into other correspondence and documents. Microsoft's annual report, filed last week, included eight mentions of "super intelligence," starting at the top of the letter to shareholders... IBM CEO Arvind Krishna, who didn't attend Trump's September lunch, used "SI" alongside "AI" during his company's earnings call last week.... Lip-Bu Tan, CEO of chipmaker Intel, said Thursday the supply shortage the chip industry is navigating has been "driven by the unprecedented demand for super intelligence." Some in the tech industry have been explicit in their support of Trump's terminology ahead of their forthcoming earnings reports next month. Palo Alto Networks CEO Nikesh Arora repeatedly referred to "SI" on CNBC, and posted on X on Sept. 30, "The meeting at the WH on SI was an epic moment...." Like Arora, [Nvidia CEO Jensen] Huang took to X after last month's AI meeting to praise the "White House Accord on Super Intelligence."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Should generative AI be used for videogame development? Brandon Stirrup, a strategy manager at Xbox, claims Xbox is already using AI, reports Engadget. And he also says that those who say they aren't are merely "pretending." Stirrup deactivated his social media account shortly after (though his posts have been archived elsewhere), igniting conversations about what role generative AI actually has or should have in game development. In some ways, it would be unsurprising to learn that Xbox is using AI to the extent that Stirrup implies. Xbox recently announced the formation of Xbox Labs at least in part as a response to a rising trend of AI-coded game ports; the announcement heavily implied that the new team would use AI as well but didn't say it outright. Xbox owner Microsoft is also a major player in AI development... Developers including Capcom, Square Enix, Sega, Nexon and Activision have all either used AI in their games or pledged to do so. Fortnite developer Epic Games has been particularly up-front about its AI use, and CEO Tim Sweeney has aggressively promoted it on social media... On the other hand, there are large pockets of the game industry vocally opposed to generative AI. Notably, these tend to be smaller, independent studios without shareholders to impress by touting the cost-savings of AI. These studios include Tunic publisher Finji, Stardew Valley developer ConcernedApe and Clickolding developer Strange Scaffold, among many more. Due to the sheer number and variety of game studios, it's impossible to say just how much of the industry actually uses AI at this point, but claims that "everyone" is using it are clearly false. There's a similar divide among players about whether generative AI should be embraced or avoided at all costs. While some simply accept AI as part of games going forward, others have pledged to avoid games that use the technology outright due to its environmental costs, labor issues or pure aesthetic preference. That's led to the popularity of tools like a browser extension that makes Steam's AI disclosures more visible and grassroots efforts by developers to implement labels certifying their games as AI-free... Many players and developers alike justify the use of AI in generating code, even if they're opposed to it in other areas. "Gaming is the only industry slow-walking the transition," Xbox's Stirrup allegedly said, "because users have negative sentiment. Everyone else accepts reality." "Gaming is the only industry pretending to not use AI."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.