We all know what AI is doing to the workforce but that’s no mystery. Has AI actually served you well, or is it all overhyped slop?
You must log in or register to comment.
Potentially useful for lots of thing, unfortunately, everyone seems fixated on stuff that is not ready for and probably wont be, or on hating everything involved.
Me? Mostly on the fence, hating most of what I see and hopeful for those useful applications.
AI is simply a tool.
The problem is the techbros thinking it’s like a cure for cancer when it is not.
It broke me out of a broken mindset at least, since no human would actually talk to me in a wise way, this therapy-pilled bot did that job instead.
It really is a good search engine, provided you check sources. It’s a good way to get around the enshitified google searches.
Good for bouncing ideas off, and low-effort stories where you play whatever role your friends would not put up with. In other words, a fun game.
However, it’s been taking more time than it’s been saving whenever I tried to get it to do more. Agentic frameworks rarely work beyond “add this bit of text to my notes while I work”, so you don’t have to search up and find certain documents. Or “tell me what my document says about so and so topic”. If you expect it to code for you, or manage your files properly, or not delete it’s own components, forget it. More effort than it’s worth.
I actually shut down my VM, as I currently have no use for it whatsoever, and I don’t like using non-local AI models, for several reasons, I will only use them when necessary.
No, it’s made it worse. I already automated the work “AI” could do before gpt was released.
Now when someone suggests a change there is always hallucinations of settings that don’t exist.
Tldr: I think current AI hype is trying to go to get to the moon by building a better ladder. It’s useful but for a few select things.
I’ve managed to automate some boring tedious task (get measurements from a dozen different wikipedia article, do simple maths with them), something that would take about an hour to do manually took 15 minutes to argue with an AI and fact check after.
Creative stuff (stories, pictures, music) is amusing for a while but I suspect they are stuck in the same kind of uncanny valley robots have been in for a long time.
I like how Yaron Minsky from Jane Street characterized LLM: “It is smarter than we expected it to be, but dumber than we needed it to be… It feels like something really dumb, but somehow memorized the entire internet.”
This is kind of what I feel: despite all these impressive BAR and IMO achievements, in my work, I feel they do a great job at parapherasing the internet, but fails when you need it to do something mildly intelligent.
Does it improve my efficiency? yes, but only at some very tedious and specific taskes, once I go slightly out of scope, it comes up with inelegant solution that I will need to rewrite from scratch.
The technology is remarkable, the implementation is lame, the impact is happening too fast for us to adapt, the damage to artists and creatives is to cry for.
Someone posted a meme yesterday comparing it to The One Ring from LOTR and I think it’s spot on.
This is the largest technology con job right now. NFTs failed, the “metaverse” failed, now a badly trained AI is the “solution to humanity’s problems”. This is just as stupid as religion.
It’s simultaneously awesome and overhyped.
I would add one more adjective to complete the description: terrible. Depending on the situation, sometimes it’s awesome, sometimes it doesn’t live up to the hype, and sometimes it’s downright terrible.
The only things it’s good for are kinda evil.
I think Alan Tudyck get fucked over because Will Smith couldn’t handle not being the most likable character in a movie.
As soon as test audiences said they loved the robot, the cut back Tudyck’s scenes and completely dropped him from promotion and intro credits.
We all know what AI is doing to the workforce
Do we?
https://budgetlab.yale.edu/research/evaluating-impact-ai-labor-market-current-state-affairs
Summary
While anxiety over the effects of AI on today’s labor market is widespread, our data suggests it remains largely speculative. The picture of AI’s impact on the labor market that emerges from our data is one that largely reflects stability, not major disruption at an economy-wide level. While generative AI looks likely to join the ranks of transformative, general purpose technologies, it is too soon to tell how disruptive the technology will be to jobs. The lack of widespread impacts at this early stage is not unlike the pace of change with previous periods of technological disruption. Preregistering areas where we would expect to see the impact and continuing to monitor monthly impacts will help us distinguish rumor from fact.
*The narrative that AI’s are causing job loss is a marketing strategy performed by the AI companies to boost their recognition through fear.
I recently completed a fairly complex implementation training in government for a team of non-technical users, including agents, agentic workflows, some RAG, and small-scale enterprise app deployments.
I find it a very cool technology, but it is dumb yet. When unbounded, AI does some cool stuff. But building for complex workflows, I find, has resulted in a mixed bag of results. Very specific functions, such as mining data patterns, it is not bad at. But add gray area and it kind of takes stabs in the dark, much like a badly defined Web search.
Even our technical teams sell it as a 10-20% increase in efficiency, not a firesale position replacement. And they’re mandated to adopt and distribute it as widely through govt as possible.
In short, I think this is a fair assessment lol AI may replace us one day, but the models are far too new yet
Slop
It’s OK in some instances where it’s a tool that helps your hands. Once you start outsourcing your head to chatgpt, you’re voluntarily letting your mental faculties rot for the sake of percieved comfort.
Over hyped trash.
