Flutterby™! : "AI" cynicism of the morning

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

"AI" cynicism of the morning

2024-07-02 18:08:38.169261+02 by Dan Lyke 0 comments

Goldman Sachs: Gen AI: too much spend, too little benefit? Turns out $50B for $3B in revenue might not be a great trade-off.

Business Insider: Goldman Sachs says the return on investment for AI might be disappointing

Via @david_chisnall@infosec.exchange who points out that, among other things:

Experienced developers using Copilot are 20% less productive.

Which I think we knew, we also know that Copilot generated code creates technical debt. And that training costs are going up faster than capability increases.

RT mhoye @mhoye@mastodon.social

An AI thing I'm watching play out at another org:

1: Expert A, with a deep understanding of a nuanced and difficult problem answers a question they've been given, offering several options.

2: Director B, recipient, uses an AI to summarize it and then runs it up to leadership saying, "A says this." That generated summary is subtly and very wrong.

3: A is now being held responsible for plans made based on B's AI-generated and very wrong rewriting of his recommendations.

Fun times.

To which Amelia Bellamy-Royds @AmeliaBR@front-end.social replied:

@mhoye New addendum to "A computer can never be held accountable, so a computer should never make a management decision":
Managers who think their job can be replaced by a computer, and who will do anything to avoid being held to account, they should never make a management decision, either.

Edit, just because I needed a place to hang it 'cause I don't think it's actually worth following, but it's nice to have: Vox: What, if anything, is AI search good for? (tl;dr: nobody knows)

[ related topics: Invention and Design Work, productivity and environment Heinlein Artificial Intelligence Economics ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

Add your own comment:

(If anyone ever actually uses Webmention/indie-action to post here, please email me)




Format with:

(You should probably use "Text" mode: URLs will be mostly recognized and linked, _underscore quoted_ text is looked up in a glossary, _underscore quoted_ (http://xyz.pdq) becomes a link, without the link in the parenthesis it becomes a <cite> tag. All <cite>ed text will point to the Flutterby knowledge base. Two enters (ie: a blank line) gets you a new paragraph, special treatment for paragraphs that are manually indented or start with "#" (as in "#include" or "#!/usr/bin/perl"), "/* " or ">" (as in a quoted message) or look like lists, or within a paragraph you can use a number of HTML tags:

p, img, br, hr, a, sub, sup, tt, i, b, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, cite, em, strong, code, samp, kbd, pre, blockquote, address, ol, dl, ul, dt, dd, li, dir, menu, table, tr, td, th

Comment policy

We will not edit your comments. However, we may delete your comments, or cause them to be hidden behind another link, if we feel they detract from the conversation. Commercial plugs are fine, if they are relevant to the conversation, and if you don't try to pretend to be a consumer. Annoying endorsements will be deleted if you're lucky, if you're not a whole bunch of people smarter and more articulate than you will ridicule you, and we will leave such ridicule in place.

Flutterby™ is a trademark claimed by

Dan Lyke
for the web publications at www.flutterby.com and www.flutterby.net.