Is your job safe from automation, artificial intelligence and robotics? In episode 3 of the Project 10 Podcast series, Cormac speaks to a range of experts about the growing levels of fear and panic when it comes to technology and automation encroaching on people's jobs. With certain Oxford Studies claiming up to 47% of the workforce could be replaced by automation by 2034, is there a real reason you should be concerned for the future of your work, or are things being blown out of proportion? Former VP of marketing for Mozilla, Alex is a consultant to a number of top tech firms and co authored a best selling book, 'The Driver in The Driverless Car'. The book was long-listed by the Financial Times and McKinsey as one of their best business books of 2017.

Here at DivvyHQ, we love a good showdown. Take for example, the a-cappella Riff-off from Pitch Perfect 2. So good, right? As technology advances, many journalists, writers, brands and content marketers have reacted by pitting technology against humans with the same Hollywood flare used in all the films mentioned above. Are robo-bosses set to replace management? Will AI software soon write blog posts better than humans?! God help us no! Are Japanese robots replacing creative directors?

The Cloverfield movies are science fiction, but what Netflix pulled off with the surprise post–Super Bowl launch of The Cloverfield Paradox is more akin to alchemy. A mere two days ago, the movie then known as God Particle was an oft-delayed entry in J.J. Abrams' amorphous franchise that had shifted more than a year from its initial release date--and was still undergoing reshoots as recently as December. While its predecessors, 2008's Cloverfield and 2016's 10 Cloverfield Lane, thrived on pre-release mystery, this was starting to feel less like calculated secrecy and more like a panicked flight. But with one brief, mildly cryptic ad, Netflix transformed an incipient lead balloon into a golden opportunity, a movie that no one was much excited about seeing into one they had to see the second the game was over. The Cloverfield Paradox was worth the wait, but only if you started the clock in the first quarter.

Professor Pascal Poupart is a senior researcher at Borealis AI, an RBC research institute, and a professor of computing science at the University of Waterloo. My parents thought I was crazy when I announced my intention to study artificial intelligence. Back then, in 1998, AI was considered a fringe group within the academic community, even though we knew the field had the potential to transform lives. Today, AI is among the hottest fields in academia, attracting the focus of every major university and the courtship of the world's biggest companies as they try to apply cognitive machine learning to just about every challenge in the marketplace. Thanks to this commercial interest and the academic pursuit of AI, we now have personal assistants in our smartphones, intelligent cybersecurity to protect our credit cards, and even recommendation engines in our favourite movie and music streaming services.

Imagine it is the spring of 2019. A bottom-feeding website, perhaps tied to Russia, "surfaces" video of a sex scene starring an 18-year-old Kirsten Gillibrand. It is soon debunked as a fake, the product of a user-friendly video application that employs generative adversarial network technology to convincingly swap out one face for another. It is the summer of 2019, and the story, predictably, has stuck around -- part talk-show joke, part right-wing talking point. "It's news," political journalists say in their own defense.

FOR the moment at least, automation is occurring all too slowly. The displacement of workers by machines ought to be bringing on a consistent rise in productivity and a faster growing economy. This is not happening in the US, Europe and Japan as well as in most parts of the world, including Malaysia – all being persistently disappointed with the outcomes. Experts warn that rapid advances in robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) could destroy millions of jobs and pose a "Terminator" style threat to human life as we know it. However unnerving the prospect, present day limitations of AI appear all too evident.

MTV's "TRL" recently welcomed Poppy, a rising star with hologram-perfect skin, an avant-garde Japanese schoolgirl wardrobe and a voice like Betty Boop's on benzos. For much of the show, she perched silently on the couch and methodically stacked candies on a glass table. A longhaired handler called Titanic Sinclair accompanied her, explaining, "I'm just making sure she doesn't malfunction." Poppy proved a tough interview. Asked what she thought of the Grammys, which had aired the night before, she chirped: "Um, I don't really remember them."

The trial opening Monday in San Francisco federal court comes nearly a year after Google spin-off Waymo sued Uber, accusing it of ripping off key pieces of its self-driving car technology in 2016. Uber paid $680 million for a startup run by Anthony Levandowski, one of the top engineers in a robotic vehicle project that Google began in 2009 and later spun out into Waymo.

Last September, Stanford professor Michal Kosinski unleashed a torrent of controversy when he used artificial intelligence to attempt to predict peoples' sexual orientation from their faces. Now he has set himself the challenge of deciphering his subjects' political beliefs with similar software.