"AI"'s killer feature is making UIs for existing non-AI technologies like OCR, speech to text, deep fakes, image manipulation etc. In many cases firms eventually look to get a better result and use the tools themselves after seeing the result ceiling.
In my experience I find most people more capable than LLMs and so do most Gen Z friends of my kids. It's an issue that will have to be solved if we are to avoid a bubble bursting.
Tulips are great looking flowers, but you can't do anything but look at them. Ask the Dutch.
This feels like an advertisement for agentic AI. Though I agree wholeheartedly that teams can be proactive about blockers, this is only introducing more dependency that can lead to wasted effort or costs. The primary proposed solution is basically accepting delay by temporarily accepting AI substitutes for blocking teams and processes and hoping that filling the AI requirements will fill the actual team's requirements when the blocker is actually dealt with. Basically option 2 or 3 with the trust that adding another dependency on AI will magically fix things. When it doesn't, it will be wasted time meeting a hallucinated response. Not to mention that when the cost of tokens starts going up to meet the market predictions of these technologies, this is going to constitute a significant financial cost for organizations and teams.
I think about this as the traffic jam conundrum. You can wait in the line of cars idling or take the exit to local roads, navigating traffic lights and driving extra miles to stay in motion while rejoining the now unjammed traffic further on right behind the same car. I'll admit I do this, but I won't pretend that the benefit after consuming additional gas was anything more than avoiding waiting for the sake of my nerves.
Am I the only one who is reminded of the ethanol attempts in the early aughts where corn prices shot up because it was going to be sold for fuel? We need Electricity for essential things like refrigeration, cooking and heat. We don't really need AI. It's a case of where the government should be protecting the citizens and expecting companies to foot the bill for their own expenses instead of expecting everyone to pay for them to get rich off of products that most consumers have less interest in. Like paying for football stadiums with property taxes. It's shameful that we keep supporting this behavior in our government.
What's really messed up about this is that as designers of what AGI even means, these mostly self-taught or otherwise non-scientific clowns who think that being rich makes them smart will create the post-human life forms they think will outlive humanity. The problem is it will be inadequate like most of their products and we'll all die for nothing.
I've been thinking that industrialization at the end of the enlightenment was not the conclusion of the enlightenment but a stifling that led back into a new dark age where we replaced God and the church with money and business. I only hope we can recognize the system has supplanted the people again.
I suspect that the so many people use AI to generate content or funny pictures outside of work argument could be true, but I know many people and only one of them does (though I can't say the last time he talked about it, I suspect the novelty wore off). I am starting to think the use of LLMs and the funding are equally circular. Computing had a similar problem in the 80's. It wasn't until high quality video games and social media came around that people really used them outside of a professional context. If big AI really wants this to take off they need to find something other than the equivalent of "you can store recipes on it" to try to sell the technology. Not everyone is a developer or content creator.
Americans have control over what they're taxed as long as they make 8 figures or more per year. The rich and corporations here are paying a share, but not as big of a share of their pie as those who make less. What people were looking to elect is someone who will treat those who can afford it the same way those who can't. Just like elections that went the other way the deciding factor is perception. If politicians would set a transparent flat tax, the elections could be about facts and not feels. Right now it feels like politicians are leveraging the pain of the many to get votes without making any change, because they're not generally affected financially y their policies.
I think this is like 90's VR. We saw all these options for it but in the end it was not as good as we imagined it was. There's a lot to explore in the space, but there's a ceiling. The technology will never live up to what we dream it is. We're imagining "Lawnmower Man" but the best we will get is Google goggles.
What would improve this for most applicants would be having access to the repos where they actually work. What I have in GitHub is mostly after-hours work that is slapped together hastily as POCs. I'd never get hired and I've been in the industry longer than VCS.
A lot of companies mentioned here have had slumps in quality. Many fast casual restaurants just microwave their food for instance. If any industry feels entitled to customers they deserve the slump.
Honestly, they already don't need 50% of what the system is offering. It's just going to take no one being able to afford it for the whole thing to break down. The lack of critical thinking at the top is breathtaking TBH.
Real values guide your actions. Whether you are a CEO or a burger chef. The problem we have is too many leaders think those values should come from someone else: shareholders, MBA programs, Steve Jobs' or Lee Iacocca's biography. Your values can be shaped, but they can't be borrowed.
This is about to backfire. Did we not learn anything from what happened in the 79s with manufacturing? If you can't afford to bring the workers here you'll send the jobs there. Does MAGA understand cause and effect at all?
> but I think it comes out of genuine frustrations from the enterprise world.
Yet politicians continue to act like the government should operate like a business and for some reason all of us working in corporate America think this is a good idea...
MAGA never ceases to amaze me on how they can create a problem from hosting an email server in your basement or create a conspiracy theory about pedophilia on the other side of the aisle, but when it comes to data they use the public cloud or services and when it comes to pedophilia they hide the records that prove the president is. Why are Americans accepting this?
This is why we used to elect and appoint officials who were "the best of us". What we have now is a government that is signalling that they want to do right by their base while doing things without research that will do the opposite. The worst is that both the officials and their base lack the ability to reason or sustain attention long enough to determine the cause and effect of decisions like these. When Intel and Motorola are belly up and the US is out the bailout money Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm Huiwei etc., banking on Chinese tech investment made by qualified officials, will be taking all the money and jobs overseas. Isolationist policy could only work in this day and age with extremely competent leadership and highly valuable reseources. After years of Oligarchy, the US has neither. Isolationism may have been fine in the 19th century, but few people had flushing toilets then. The 21st century is completely different.
Always picks the loser. What a great businessman. Right now this looks like he's turned our government into a private equity firm. If we'd have elected Mitt Romney all those times we had a chance we could have had someone who's experienced at running a private equity firm instead of failed casinos.
To elaborate on this, the LLM is anonymous to the user and removes most social expectations from the interaction. Facing a person with expertise in a field one has little experience in is intimidating for many people. Here we see the drop of social awareness due to the anonymity of a text input actually as a benefit. It would be interesting to have a blind study where one person asks these questions answered by a professional and another gets answers from an AI and see if there's any difference in user satisfaction.
Since when is Harvard a public school? Frankly, no college in the US can be called a public school only getting between 20-30% of their funding. If our bully in chief and the political right want to tell colleges who to educate they could try ponying up the cost. Otherwise if a Chinese or North Korean wants to go to Harvard, has the academic chops and can pay for it, they can go there. That's a free market.
I think this conversation is dancing around the relationship of memory and knowledge. Simply storing information is different than knowing it. One of you is thinking book learning while the other is thinking street smarts.