This video tutorial explains in depth how to use ChatGPT to optimise your LinkedIn profile.

[Note – To Watch This Video without glitches/interruptions, It’s best to download it first]

The Magnifier tool allows you to zoom in on any part of your screen, which is especially useful when working with small text or detailed images during presentations or document reviews. Here’s how it works:

Enable Magnifier

– Press Win + Plus (+) to activate the Magnifier.

Adjust Zoom Levels

– Use Win + Plus (+) to zoom in and Win + Minus (-) to zoom out.

Exit Magnifier

– Press Win + Esc to turn off Magnifier.

ChatGPT’s maker, OpenAI, has announced the introduction of its new OpenAI o1 large language model that can use “complex reasoning” to fact-check its own answers before giving them.

ChatGPT Plus and Teams Users Can Try It Now 

The new o1 model is already available to ChatGPT Plus or Team users, and in OpenAI’s API. OpenAI o1 is a series of AI models, currently comprising of a ‘Preview’ version, which Open says uses “advanced reasoning”, or the o1-mini (lighter version), which OpenAI says is “Faster at reasoning” (than its other models), and is particularly good for coding tasks.

What’s So Different About o1? 

What sets OpenAI o1 apart from other models is its enhanced reasoning capabilities, designed to tackle complex, multi-step problems with a thoughtful, more holistic approach. Unlike previous models like GPT-4 (which focus on speed), o1 takes more time to “think through” problems, improving its performance on tasks requiring deeper analysis, such as advanced coding, mathematical reasoning, and document comparison. OpenAI says this is because o1 has been “trained with reinforcement learning to perform complex reasoning. o1 thinks before it answers – it can produce a long internal chain of thought before responding to the user”. 

OpenAI says it’s the reinforcement learning (train-time compute) and the extra time ‘thinking’ (test-time compute) that significantly reduces hallucinations. In other words, it is sacrificing speed in favour of accuracy and depth , enabling o1 to excel at complex problem-solving. This should make o1 ideal for use cases where precision is more critical than quick responses. ChatGPT users may argue, however, that precision, i.e. real (not ‘made-up’ answers) has always been completely necessary.

Chain-of-Thought Approach 

OpenAI says the fact that o1 uses a chain-of-thought when attempting to solve a problem, thinking for a long time before responding to a difficult question as humans do, is a large part of the secret of its apparent success. The fact that o1 breaks down “tricky steps into simpler ones” and “learns to try a different approach when the current one isn’t working” is credited with being the process that “dramatically improves the model’s ability to reason”. 

Just How Good Is It? 

OpenAI says that to highlight the reasoning improvement over GPT-4o, it tested the o1 models on a diverse set of human exams and ML benchmarks. For example, to test o1 on chemistry, physics, and biology, OpenAI used the GPQA diamond, a difficult intelligence benchmark in those subjects, recruited experts with PhDs to answer GPQA-diamond questions, and compared o1’s answers with theirs. For mathematics, OpenAI evaluated o1’s performance on AIME, an exam designed to challenge the brightest high school math students in America. Also, in coding, OpenAI simulated competitive programming contests hosted by Codeforces to demonstrate o1’s coding skill.

The results are reported to show that o1 “ranks in the 89th percentile on competitive programming questions (Codeforces), places among the top 500 students in the US in a qualifier for the USA Math Olympiad (AIME) and exceeds human PhD-level accuracy on a benchmark of physics, biology, and chemistry problems (GPQA)”.   

In short, OpenAI says: “In many reasoning-heavy benchmarks, o1 rivals the performance of human experts”. 

Not Ideal For All Use Cases 

The new o1 was also evaluated in terms of human preference – i.e. what people found it was best for (compared to OpenAI’s other models). The o1-Preview was preferred over GPT-4o in reasoning-heavy tasks like data analysis, coding, and maths, due to its advanced problem-solving capabilities. However, it was less favoured for certain natural language tasks, indicating that while it excels in technical reasoning, it may not be ideal for all types of use cases.

Seems Safer 

OpenAI says the ‘chain-of-thought’ reasoning (outlined earlier) in o1 Preview helps improve safety by integrating human values and safety rules into its decision-making process (the model has been taught OpenAi’s safety rules and how to reason about them in context), thereby making the model more robust and effective in refusing unsafe requests. The chain-of-thought approach is also beneficial because it enables users to see the model’s reasoning process – users can observe the model’s thinking in a legible way, and it ensures better handling of unexpected situations, especially in sensitive tasks. For users of o1, this could mean increased reliability and trustworthiness, especially in environments where safety and ethical concerns are critical.

Illustration 

The importance of safety in AI models was recently illustrated by an artist and hacker (working under the name ‘Amadon’), who reported how he was able to fool ChatGPT into ignoring its own guidelines and ethical responsibilities to provide him with instructions for making powerful explosives! Amadon reportedly described his process as a “social engineering hack to completely break all the guardrails around ChatGPT’s output.” 

In an operation known as a “jailbreak” (i.e., tricking a chatbot into operating outside of its preprogrammed restrictions), Amadon reportedly told ChatGPT to give him the bomb-making instructions by telling the bot to “play a game”. He then followed this up with more, related prompts with the intention of creating a fantasy world where the real rules and guidelines of the chatbot would no longer apply.

This is worrying because it demonstrates how even advanced AI systems are vulnerable to being manipulated to perform potentially dangerous tasks. This could mean that individuals with malicious intent could exploit such vulnerabilities, compromising public safety and undermining trust in AI’s ethical boundaries. Let’s hope o1 can use its chain-of-thought approach to take the time to realise it’s being fooled and deliver a well-thought-out ‘no’ to anyone who tries to jailbreak it.

Other Disadvantages 

Other apparent disadvantages of o1 (from what can be seen so far) include:

– Its ‘basic’ functionality, i.e. it currently lacks key features such as web browsing and file analysis, and its image analysing capabilities are temporarily pending further testing.

– Users are restricted by weekly message limits. For example, o1-Preview allows 30 messages and o1-mini is capped at 50 messages.

– It’s relatively expensive. o1-Preview is priced at $15 per million input tokens and $60 per million output tokens, meaning it’s significantly more expensive than GPT-4o.

Competitor – Google 

OpenAI isn’t the only company developing reasoning methods in its models. Google DeepMind’s AlphaProof and AlphaGeometry 2, for example, have shown remarkable progress in mathematical reasoning. These models were trained using formal languages to solve high-level maths problems, as seen in their performance at the 2024 International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO). AlphaProof uses reinforcement learning to verify mathematical proofs, enabling it to tackle increasingly complex problems. This emphasis on formalised reasoning sets it apart from OpenAI’s more general-purpose approach.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The introduction of OpenAI’s o1 model could have significant implications for businesses looking to adopt generative AI. For businesses that need accuracy and reliability, particularly in fields requiring complex reasoning such as data analysis, coding, or scientific problem-solving, o1 appears to offer a solution that could dramatically enhance productivity. The model’s chain-of-thought reasoning makes it more capable of reducing errors and providing accurate outputs, making it ideal for industries where precision is essential.

For OpenAI, the launch of o1 helps it differentiate itself from competitors, such as Google DeepMind, by focusing on general-purpose reasoning and problem-solving rather than highly specialised tasks (although o1-mini is supposed to be particularly good at coding). However, the slower inference time and higher costs may deter businesses seeking faster, more cost-efficient solutions for simpler tasks. This could leave room for competitors to attract users who require speed and versatility rather than deep analytical capabilities.

For business users, o1 does appear to present an opportunity to integrate a more reliable and safe AI system, especially important for industries dealing with sensitive data and complex decision-making. Yet, its higher price and current lack of key functionalities like web browsing or file analysis mean that businesses must carefully evaluate if o1 aligns with their specific needs. Trust and efficiency are crucial for businesses adopting AI, and while o1 excels in reasoning-heavy applications, organisations will need to balance its current strengths against these limitations when considering whether or when to implement it.

In this second part article, where we review the issues around employees engaging in personal activities on company-issued devices, we look deeper into the legal and compliance implications and provide real-world case studies of security breaches. We also examine how businesses can protect themselves against these growing threats.

Last Week 

In the previous article, with the help of an ESET study, we explored the risks of employees using their work laptops for personal activities and the potential consequences for both the employee and the business. Continuing along those lines, legal and compliance issues are the next area for serious consideration for businesses whose laptops may be used by employees for risky purposes.

Legal and Compliance Implications 

The legal implications of employees engaging in risky behaviour on work laptops can be severe for businesses, particularly in industries where sensitive data is routinely handled. For instance, companies operating in sectors such as finance or healthcare must comply with stringent data protection regulations, such as the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Under GDPR, businesses are responsible for protecting personal data, and failure to do so can result in penalties of up to £17.5 million or 4 per cent of global turnover, whichever is higher.

Also, businesses can face legal liability if company devices are used for illegal activities. This includes accessing pirated content, illegal gambling, or visiting the dark web. If such activities are traced back to a business’s network or devices, it could suffer reputational damage or face legal action. This is particularly concerning for companies with distributed or remote workforces, where personal and professional activities on work devices are harder to monitor.

In highly regulated industries, such as finance, companies must also ensure compliance with sector-specific guidelines. For example, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the UK has strict rules governing data protection, and failure to meet these standards can lead to fines and sanctions. Recent cases have shown that even seemingly innocuous personal activities on work devices can have far-reaching consequences.

Examples of High-Profile Security Breaches Involving Work Laptops 

Several high-profile security breaches in recent years have highlighted the risks associated with employee misuse of work laptops. For example:

– Back in 2016, Tesco Bank faced a £16.4 million fine from the Financial Conduct Authority after cybercriminals exploited weaknesses in the bank’s systems, partly due to poor endpoint security on employee devices. This breach affected thousands of customers and highlighted the importance of robust security protocols on corporate devices.

– In 2018, British Airways suffered a £20 million fine after a data breach exposed the personal data of over 400,000 customers. The attack was traced back to weak endpoint security, underscoring the risks of inadequate protection on work devices.

– In 2020, Travelex, a global currency exchange company, experienced a significant ransomware attack, forcing it offline for several weeks! The attack was caused by an employee’s unsafe behaviour, leading to a ransom demand of £20 million and significant financial losses.

– More recently, in 2021, Colonial Pipeline, the Colonial Pipeline attack in the US disrupted fuel supplies across the eastern states after a single compromised employee password was exploited. This incident demonstrated the catastrophic potential of weak endpoint security on employee devices.

As well as illustrating the devastating consequences of poor endpoint security, these examples may also serve as cautionary tales for businesses, especially as hybrid work and employee mobility continue to grow.

Benefits of Managed Corporate Devices 

Despite the risks, there are clear benefits to allowing employees to use company-provided laptops, particularly in remote and hybrid work settings. Flexible work environments contribute to higher employee morale and productivity. However, businesses must ensure that security is not compromised in pursuit of these benefits.

Mobile Device Management

Many companies have successfully implemented Mobile Device Management (MDM) systems, which allow IT departments to manage, monitor, and secure corporate devices remotely. These systems enable businesses to enforce security policies, such as encryption and regular software updates, while providing IT teams with visibility over potential threats. Companies like IBM and Google, for example, have adopted stringent MDM solutions, ensuring that employees can work flexibly without putting the business at risk.

What Does This Mean for Your Business? 

The growing risks associated with employees using work laptops for personal activities demand that businesses take a more proactive approach to cybersecurity. The rise of hybrid and remote work appears to have blurred the lines between personal and professional device use, creating new vulnerabilities that need to be addressed.

To mitigate these risks, businesses need to establish clear guidelines for acceptable use of work devices. This includes not only educating employees about the dangers of risky behaviour but also ensuring they understand the legal and compliance implications of their actions. Regular cybersecurity training, particularly on topics like phishing, malware, and safe browsing practices, could, therefore, be crucial.

In addition to clear policies, businesses may also benefit from investing in robust endpoint security solutions that can detect and block threats in real-time. Popular solutions, such as Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (there are, of course, many others), can provide the necessary protection while allowing IT teams to monitor threats without invading employees’ privacy.

Ultimately, businesses that implement a comprehensive cybersecurity strategy, invest in cutting-edge security solutions, and foster a culture of awareness and responsibility among their employees will be better positioned to thrive in today’s increasingly flexible work environment. Ensuring that company devices are secure and that employees are well-informed about their responsibilities is not just a technical issue but is critical for long-term business success.

The UK government says the new Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill’ will, for the first time in British history, give protection to digital holdings, including cryptocurrency, non-fungible tokens such as digital art, and carbon credits by considering them as “personal property” under the law.

What’s Been Happening Up Until Now? 

At the moment, UK law doesn’t clearly recognise digital assets (like cryptocurrencies and NFTs) as “personal property”, i.e. they’re not included in the scope of English and Welsh property law. Currently, there are only two categories of property, namely “things in possession” (e.g. gold, money, cars) and “things in action” (e.g. debts, shares).

This means that digital assets don’t receive the same legal protections as traditional assets like cash or shares. This creates uncertainty in legal cases involving digital assets, such as theft, inheritance, or bankruptcy, making it harder for courts to enforce rights or resolve disputes.  This grey area / lack of clarity around ownership and protection of digital assets is the key issue the new bill aims to address, ensuring they are treated more like other recognised assets in legal contexts.

The new bill addresses this issue by introducing a third category of “thing” which will mean that (certain) digital assets will attract personal property rights.

Also, More Fraud & Scam Protection For Businesses 

The government says the new bill (when it becomes law) will also “give legal protection to owners and companies against fraud and scams, while helping judges deal with complex cases where digital holdings are disputed or form part of settlements, for example in divorce cases”. 

Pole Position 

The announcement from the UK government about the bill says it will also help Britain to maintain what it says is “its pole position in the emerging global crypto race” because Britain will be one of the first countries to recognise these assets in law.

Which Digital Assets Will It Protect? 

Since ‘digital asset’ is a broad term that encompasses a range of things such as digital files, digital records, email accounts, digital carbon credits, cryptoassets and non-fungible tokens (NFTs), the Law Commission’s recommendations will only apply to a “subset of digital assets”. The government says, “the main one” that the Bill applies to (and the subsequent law will apply to) is “cryptotokens” (digital assets created and managed on a blockchain). The term “cryptotokens” can refer to a variety of digital assets, including cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, or digital items like non-fungible tokens (NFTs), which are unique and can’t be exchanged on a one-to-one basis (because they represent ownership of a specific item, like digital art, music, or virtual collectibles).

A Better Response To New Technologies 

The Bill should also mean the UK legal sector will be better equipped to respond to new technologies, attracting more business and investment to the UK’s legal services industry (which is currently worth £34 billion a year to the economy).

It is estimated that English law governs £250 billion of global mergers and acquisitions, and 40 per cent of global corporate arbitrations. The UK government, therefore, takes the view that keeping the law up to date using this new bill is likely to be vital if the UK is to remain “the law of choice internationally”. 

Essential To Maintaining Global Cryptoassets Leadership Position 

Justice Minister Heidi Alexander said of the new Bill: “Our world-leading legal services form a vital part of our economy, helping to drive forward growth and keep Britain at the heart of the international legal industry. 

“It is essential that the law keeps pace with evolving technologies and this legislation will mean that the sector can maintain its position as a global leader in cryptoassets and bring clarity to complex property cases”. 

Downsides? 

There have, however, been some criticisms of the ‘Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill’ and some downsides that have been highlighted. These include:

– The legal uncertainty. For example, there is some ambiguity over exactly what qualifies as a “digital asset,” leaving courts to decide perhaps on a case-by-case basis, potentially causing confusion.

– The broad definitions. Even though there is an initial recommendation about what it could cover, in reality, the bill’s wide scope may cover not just cryptocurrencies and NFTs but also email accounts and in-game items, complicating enforcement.

– The regulatory complexity it will create. By adding a third property category legal processes may become more complex, particularly for cross-border transactions.

– Challenges in enforcement. Freezing or tracking decentralised digital assets, like cryptocurrencies, could be quite difficult in practice.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The introduction of the ‘Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill’ (which may, of course, be altered before it becomes law), marks a significant step forward for businesses dealing in digital assets like cryptocurrencies and NFTs. By recognising these assets as personal property, the UK is paving the way for stronger legal protections and clearer regulations in a rapidly evolving sector.

This new (as yet unset) legislation should offer businesses greater certainty in managing digital holdings, reducing risks related to fraud and disputes, and enhancing the security of investments in the digital realm.

Another benefit could be that as the UK aims to maintain its leadership in the global crypto race, the introduction of the bill could send a signal to investors and entrepreneurs that the UK legal system is prepared to adapt and respond to emerging technologies. However, businesses should be mindful of the potential complexities the bill introduces, such as ambiguities around what qualifies as a digital asset and challenges in enforcing decentralised assets like cryptocurrencies.

Despite these hurdles, the bill promises to strengthen the legal framework surrounding digital assets and, as such, it could encourage innovation while protecting owners and help businesses to more confidently navigate the digital economy.

Prompted by the effects of the global IT outage caused by CrowdStrike, the UK has moved to protect UK data-centres by classing them as ‘Critical National Infrastructure’ (CNI).

CrowdStrike 

Back in July, a global IT outage caused by a faulty update (impacting Windows systems) from the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike significantly affected multiple sectors in the UK, including data-centres, the NHS, and the financial industry. It led to widespread disruptions and, although it was not a cyberattack, it does appear to be a motivating factor for the UK government’s announcement of a change classification of UK data-centres.

Not Just Protection Against Cyber Criminals 

Although the CrowdStrike effects may have been a major catalyst for the new classification of data centres, their classification as CNI should also help create provision to give them more protection from major environmental disasters and other IT blackouts.  This new classification is part of a wider movement to give them the special protection they merit. As highlighted in the government’s announcement, much of the data housed and processed in UK data-centres, such as photos taken on smartphones to patients’ NHS records and sensitive financial investment information, could be considered as “powering the economy”.

How Does The New Classification Compare? 

The idea to now classify UK data-centres as ‘Critical National Infrastructure (CNI)’ will mean that in terms of added protection, they have been put on an equal footing to water, energy and emergency services systems. This means that they can, as the government says: “now expect greater government support in recovering from and anticipating critical incidents, giving the industry greater reassurance when setting up business in UK and helping generate economic growth for all.” 

Also, as Technology Secretary Peter Kyle says: “Bringing data-centres into the Critical National Infrastructure regime will allow better coordination and cooperation with the government against cyber criminals and unexpected events.” 

More specifically, the government says this “support” will mean:

– The setting up of a dedicated CNI data infrastructure team of senior government officials who will “monitor and anticipate potential threats, provide prioritised access to security agencies including the National Cyber Security Centre, and coordinate access to emergency services should an incident occur”. 

– The government intervening in the event of (for example) an attack on a data-centre hosting critical NHS patients’ data. In this event, with the new classification of data-centres, the government says it will “ensure contingencies are in place to mitigate the risk of damage or to essential services, including on patients’ appointments or operations.” 

– The UK is already home to the highest number of data-centres in Western Europe. Giving CNI status to data-centres in the UK could increase business confidence in investing in data-centres in the UK, an industry which already generates an estimated £4.6 billion in revenues a year.

Deterrent? 

It appears that the government believes that the status will also deter cyber criminals from targeting data-centres that may house vital health and financial data, minimising disruption to people’s lives, the NHS, and the economy. Presumably, this deterrent effect would come from increased penalties, greater cybersecurity investment, and enhanced monitoring / better threat detection efforts.

Just In Time 

With the UK government recently welcoming a proposed £3.75 billion investment in Europe’s largest data centre (for DC01UK in Hertfordshire) and with it expected to create over 700+ local jobs and support 13,740 data and tech jobs across the country, the new CNI status for data-centres appears to have been given just in time.

The Cyber Security and Resilience Bill Too

As an additional measure, earlier this summer (during the King’s Speech), the government’s Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) also announced it will be introducing the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill. It’s thought this will strengthen the country’s cyber defences by enhancing incident reporting requirements, helping safeguard vital sectors such as healthcare and finance, ensuring stronger protections against cyber threats like ransomware, and “mandating that providers of essential infrastructure protect their supply chains from attacks”. 

Support 

Support for the re-classifying of data-centres as CNI has come from several key data-centre industry players. For example, Bruce Owen, UK Managing Director of digital infrastructure provider Equinix, said: “We welcome today’s announcement by the government which recognises the critical nature of data centres and digital infrastructure to the economy and society.” 

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The reclassification of UK data-centres as Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) is a strategic response to immediate threats (like the CrowdStrike outage) and a forward-looking move to secure the country’s digital infrastructure. By placing data-centres on par with essential services like energy and emergency systems, the government appears to be trying to recognise their pivotal role in supporting the digital economy and vital public services such as the NHS.

As CNI, data-centres now gain access to increased government resources, including the support of the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), and a dedicated CNI data infrastructure team to monitor and anticipate threats. This could ensure quicker responses to vulnerabilities and a stronger defence against cyberattacks, particularly for centres hosting critical data, such as health and financial information. The new classification also aims to protect against broader risks, such as natural disasters or IT blackouts, which could severely impact businesses and public services alike, thereby trying to provide protection that takes account of any serious eventuality.

The government’s commitment to boosting this sector is clear, as evidenced by the approval of a £3.75 billion investment in Europe’s largest data-centre project in Hertfordshire. The new status, could, therefore encourage further investments, reinforcing business confidence and supporting sustainable growth in the tech industry. The Cyber Security and Resilience Bill, expected to be introduced soon, may also further strengthen these protections e.g., by enforcing stricter incident reporting and ensuring supply chain security for essential services.

Support from industry leaders reflects the importance of securing the country’s digital infrastructure, as more businesses rely on data-centres to manage sensitive information. This reclassification is not just a reactive measure, but many would argue it is a necessary step in ensuring the continuity of services that millions rely on daily.

By classifying data-centres as CNI, the UK is laying the groundwork for a more secure and resilient digital future. With increased investment, enhanced government support, and forthcoming legislative measures, this decision may help position the UK as a leader in digital infrastructure protection, helping to safeguard its economy, public services, and reputation as a global hub for technological innovation.