My job just let us know that they are going to invest about $170,000 into AI subscriptions per year. A few days later, they fired an artist they had hired for over a decade. A chunk of us are pretty upset but the rest don’t seem to care. They’re too busy playing with Ai making it generate “funny” pictures.
I’m sorry to hear that. Very sad.
Yeah, it’s not great. I feel terrible for the guy because he lives on his own and has a mortgage to pay. I just hope he can get back on his feet sooner rather than later.
LLMs are pretty OK at a couple of things. But the way they’re being sold as the next big thing? I’m not buying that.
And they won’t until they start charging users who have habitualized AI use, just like they did to get the gig economy rolling.
All we need now to is to figure out which one is the Uber of digital personal assistants.
Oh, that’s actually the opposite of what the headline and article are talking about. It’s discussing how companies who have started using AI - that is, become the “habitualized user” - aren’t seeing any business benefits. Adding the real cost of use on top of that is going to make the decision a significant loss for these groups.
It is unsustainable. There is no way any of them are at such an exorbitant scale.
This article isn’t about AI companies at all. Not one is mentioned, iirc.
This article is about “regular” businesses’ use of AI.
And they won’t until they start charging users
Even after they start charging users they won’t, because who’s going to pay the absurd costs? Most consumers are doing whatever they can to avoid it or get rid of it.
“In fact, rather than worrying that AI might not live up to the hype, the biggest concern among CEOs is whether they are transforming fast enough to keep pace with technological change.”
The title is slightly misleading. CEO’s aren’t thinking AI is a waste of time and money, they’re thinking they aren’t moving to AI fast enough.
good…
We will make the value appear… like it or not.
Finally, some good news as of late
