Suggestions
Lars Hamberg
Analytics
Lars Hamberg is a prominent figure in the financial industry and artificial intelligence sector. He is the founder and CEO of bigpredict, as well as the co-founder and former CEO of Gavagai, a Swedish company specializing in AI research.13
Professional Background
Lars Hamberg has over 20 years of experience in the financial services industry, having held senior positions at major institutions like UBS and ABN AMRO, where he served as head of research.12 His expertise spans various areas including:
- Artificial Intelligence
- Financial services innovation
- Digital transformation
- Predictive analytics
- Big data
- FinTech
Entrepreneurial Ventures
Hamberg is known for founding several "game-changer" businesses:
- bigpredict (current role as Founder and CEO)
- Gavagai (co-founder and former CEO), which launched the first commercial large language model1
Academic and Literary Contributions
- Holds a Master of Laws (LLM) degree from Stockholm University
- Pursued PhD studies at LTU (Luleå University of Technology)
- Authored a book on counter-party risk in OTC-derivatives trading12
Speaking and Expertise
Lars Hamberg is a frequent keynote speaker at major industry events, discussing topics such as:
- AI's impact on financial services, banking, and asset management
- Advanced analytics in the production and distribution of financial products
- Language models and prediction modeling in the financial sector13
His speaking style is described as direct and engaging, combining deep domain knowledge with practical experience and a touch of dry humor.2
Additional Roles
- Has been an arbiter at the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce Arbitration Institute
- Served as CEO for restructuring Glitnir AB after the Icelandic financial crisis
- Involved in various research projects related to big data and AI applications in finance23
Lars Hamberg's LinkedIn username is lars-hamberg-2049aaa, as confirmed by the query.4
Highlights
I've been a subscriber of The Economist for 42 years, ever since my father gifted me a subscription when I was 14 years old.
Every week, I’d dive into every issue, every section, taking about a week to get through. Those pages taught me perhaps most of what I know, and I’d guess probably shaped my thinking and, in a sense, who I became.
However, I've noticed some changes that make it less appealing to me now.
The Economist seems to reflect a Western world and culture that has become softer, weaker, and false, in some Orwellian sense.
The magazine doesn’t hold its ground as I would have expected the old Economist to. Or maybe it is the ground that has changed.
As modern society drifts further from the truth, it (society) not only despises those who speak it but also increasingly demands that truth be diluted, disguised, sweetened, muted, or falsified.
It takes courage to stand firm, to adhere to principles and reason.
Over the years, The Economist has shifted towards a more left-leaning and liberal stance.
It now aligns more with liberal, progressive, or left-wing thought and globalist policy agendas.
While it still upholds principles of classical liberalism, its increased focus on socially liberal issues and political correctness represents a significant shift from its traditionally more conservative economic positions.
While The Economist just doesn’t capture my interest like it used to, I’m optimistic about finding new information sources that are more courageous and more intellectually honest elsewhere.
Thank you The Economist for a really great time together. It was a beautiful friendship, even though it wasn’t mutual. Now it’s time we go separate ways.
Three things to know about:
-
The Decision Paradox
-
The Size Paradox
-
The Solution Paradox
—-
Most large digital projects fail and project failure is the main reason CEO:s get fired.
Consultant and vendor interests in promoting large, profitable projects aimed at becoming “data-driven” often conflict with their clients' needs for smaller, manageable, effective, and successful solutions.
-
As a result, companies, or rather their leadership, ironically make investment decisions to become "data-driven" based on emotions, not data (the Decision Paradox).
-
Consequently, companies waste money on huge digital projects that fail due to complexity, instead of succeeding with smaller, manageable projects (the Size Paradox).
-
Instead of finding solutions to their problems, companies often end up in the backward position of trying to find problems for their solution (the Solution Paradox).
I elaborate on this in article (comments).
Huge and failed data lake projects serve as great illustrations of this phenomenon. This is normal and perfectly in order.
Everybody plays their assigned part: sales people sell, and leaders that get swayed easily - and waste shareholders money as a result - should pay the price.
NB: These paradoxes are common in the realm of digital projects (e.g. AI and analytics projects) and NOT the main reasons organizational change projects fail in general.
