The term “black swan” refers to a shocking event on nobody’s radar until it actually happens. This has become a byword in risk analysis since a book called “The Black Swan” by Nassim Nicholas Taleb was published in 2007. A frequently cited example is the 9/11 attacks.

Fewer people have heard of “gray swans“. Derived from Taleb’s work, gray swans are rare but more foreseeable events. That is, things we know could have a massive impact, but we don’t (or won’t) adequately prepare for.

COVID was a good example: precedents for a global pandemic existed, but the world was caught off guard anyway.

Although he sometimes uses the term, Taleb doesn’t appear to be a big fan of gray swans. He’s previously expressed frustration that his concepts are often misused, which can lead to sloppy thinking about the deeper issues of truly unforeseeable risks.

But it’s hard to deny there is a spectrum of predictability, and it’s easier to see some major shocks coming. Perhaps nowhere is this more obvious than in the world of artificial intelligence (AI).

Putting our eggs in one basket

Increasingly, the future of the global economy and human thriving has become tied to a single technological story: the AI revolution. It has turned philosophical questions about risk into a multitrillion-dollar dilemma about how we align ourselves with possible futures.

US tech company Nvidia, which dominates the market for AI chips, recently surpassed US$5 trillion (about A$7.7 trillion) in market value. The “Magnificent Seven” US tech stocks—Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla—now make up about 40% of the S&P 500 stock index.

The impact of a collapse for these companies—and a stock market bust—would be devastating at a global level, not just financially but also in terms of dashed hopes for progress.

AI’s gray swans

There are three broad categories of risk—beyond the economic realm—that could bring the AI euphoria to an abrupt halt. They’re gray swans because we can see them coming but arguably don’t (or won’t) prepare for them.

1. Security and terror shocks

AI’s ability to generate code, malicious plans and convincing fake media makes it a force multiplier for bad actors. Cheap, open models could help design drone swarms, toxins or cyber attacks. Deepfakes could spoof military commands or spread panic through fake broadcasts.

Arguably, the closest of these risks to a “white swan“—a foreseeable risk with relatively predictable consequences—stems from China’s aggression toward Taiwan.

The world’s biggest AI firms depend heavily on Taiwan’s semiconductor industry for the manufacture of advanced chips. Any conflict or blockade would freeze global progress overnight.

2. Legal shocks

Some AI firms have already been sued for allegedly using text and images scraped from the internet to train their models.

One of the best-known examples is the ongoing case of The New York Times versus OpenAI, but there are many similar disputes around the world.

If a major court were to rule that such use counts as commercial exploitation, it could unleash enormous damages claims from publishers, artists and brands.

A few landmark legal rulings could force major AI companies to press pause on developing their models further—effectively halting the AI build-out.

3. One breakthrough too many: innovation shocks

Innovation is usually celebrated, but for companies investing in AI, it could be fatal. New AI technology that autonomously manipulates markets (or even news that one is already doing so) would make current financial security systems obsolete.

And an advanced, open-source, free AI model could easily vaporize the profits of today’s industry leaders. We got a glimpse of this possibility in January’s DeepSeek dip, when details about a relatively cheaper, more efficient AI model developed in China caused US tech stocks to plummet.

Why we struggle to prepare for gray swans

Risk analysts, particularly in finance, often talk in terms of historical data. Statistics can give a reassuring illusion of consistency and control. But the future doesn’t always behave like the past.

The wise among us apply reason to carefully confirmed facts and are skeptical of market narratives.

Deeper causes are psychological: our minds encode things efficiently, often relying on one symbol to represent very complex phenomena.

It takes us a long time to remodel our representations of the world into believing a looming big risk is worth taking action over—as we’ve seen with the world’s slow response to climate change.

How can we deal with gray swans?

Staying aware of risks is important. But what matters most isn’t prediction. We need to design for a deeper sort of resilience that Taleb calls “antifragility“.

Taleb argues systems should be built to withstand—or even benefit from—shocks, rather than rely on perfect foresight.

For policymakers, this means ensuring regulation, supply chains and institutions are built to survive a range of major shocks. For individuals, it means diversifying our bets, keeping options open and resisting the illusion that history can tell us everything.

Above all, the biggest problem with the AI boom is its speed. It is reshaping the global risk landscape faster than we can chart its gray swans. Some may collide and cause spectacular destruction before we can react.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The OLED looks great, but one of the benefits of OLED is HDR in gaming, thanks to the incredible contrast from being able to turn off individual pixels. OLED isn’t known for being bright, but lately, that’s improved on laptops and external monitors. The OLED display on the Lenovo Legion 7i Gen 10, for example, can be cranked up to over 1,000 nits, creating an impressive HDR effect. The Razer Blade 14, however, only maxes out at 620 nits in HDR and 377 nits in SDR. Because of that, I could hardly tell HDR was even turned on. It’s still a pretty screen, and OLED has other benefits over IPS panels, including faster response times, less motion blur, and higher contrast.

Unfortunately, the Razer Blade 14’s OLED panel is not as colorful as the one I tested on the Razer Blade 16, with a color accuracy of 1.3 and 86 percent coverage of the AdobeRGB color space. Also, the 120-Hz refresh rate is standard for OLED laptops, but you can get 240-Hz speeds on laptops that use IPS, like the Alienware 16X Aurora, which happens to be a much cheaper device.

The Razer Blade 14’s biggest competition is the ROG Zephyrus G14. I haven’t tested the latest model yet, but it’s a laptop we’ve liked for years now, and it’s on sale often enough for less than the Blade 14. The only real difference is that the Blade 14 uses a more powerful AMD processor, the Ryzen AI 9 365. Not only does it perform better in anything CPU-intensive, such as certain games and creative applications, but it’s also a more efficient chip.

That leads to some improved battery life—at least, better than your average gaming laptop. I got 10 hours and 19 minutes in a local video playback test, which is about the most you can expect to get from the device. On the other hand, Asus offers higher-powered configurations of the Zephyrus G14, including one that includes the more powerful Ryzen AI 9 HX.

The RTX 5070 Takes Charge

Bad news: The RAM is no longer user-upgradeable on the Razer Blade 14, so you’ll have to configure it up front with what you need. My review unit had 32 GB, but you can also choose either 16 GB or 64 GB. Because it’s soldered, the memory speeds are faster. As for internal storage, you still get one open M.2 slot to expand space if you need it, supporting up to 4 TB.

Germany’s Volkswagen said on Wednesday it would develop an in-house assisted driving chip for its business in China as it seeks to recover from sagging sales in the world’s largest auto market.

Volkswagen is still the leading foreign group operating in China but the auto giant’s sales have drooped as local brands rise. It is also seeking to insulate itself from global tensions over semiconductors.

The group announced a series of new electric and hybrid vehicles in April and an assisted driving system designed specifically for the Chinese market in an effort to counter that slide.

“We are accelerating and deepening the implementation of our ‘In China, for China’ strategy—moving beyond localized production to mastering the core technologies that shape tomorrow’s mobility,” Ralf Brandstatter, CEO of Volkswagen Group China, said in a news release on Wednesday.

It is the first time the Volkswagen Group has developed its own in-house chip of this sort, a spokesman said.

Responsibility for its design and production will lie with a joint venture between CARIAD, Volkswagen’s software company, and Chinese technology company Horizon Robotics.

Smart driving capabilities have emerged as a key battleground in China’s cut-throat domestic auto market.

Semiconductors have also increasingly become the target of global trade tensions, in particular between the United States and China.

Washington has steadily expanded export controls in recent years, particularly in advanced chips and digital infrastructure.

European automakers have also been rocked by a row between China and the Netherlands over Nexperia chips, which despite being relatively simple in technology terms are nonetheless crucial as vehicles rely more on electronics.

Volkswagen’s aim with the new chip is “taking control of a key technology that will define the future of intelligent driving,” CEO Oliver Blume said in the news release.

“This marks the next logical step in our strategy for outstanding long-term innovation capabilities.”

The chip is expected to be delivered within the next three to five years, the release said.

Asked whether there were plans to eventually use the chip outside the Chinese market, a spokesman said the focus was currently on “localized implementation”.

“Looking ahead, we will align with the Group’s overall strategic roadmap to feed technological achievements from China back into the global business,” he said.

© 2025 AFP