I have yet to hear even a remotely plausible answer to this question: "If LLM-AI is so very obviously and wonderfully powerful and productive, why is it necessary to force people to use it?"
2 Boosts
0 Likes
@GeePawHill So it can convincingly mimic you when the time comes.
It can't be you if you don't train it on your activities.
@GeePawHill the CEO seems to be deathly afraid that a competitor could have found a way to integrate LLMs in a way that makes our product obsolete overnight, despite having no clear idea of what it could do. Or that a competitor might be channeling that energy into actually improving the product.
I sort of feel for him. It must be hard having so many people rely on you when your entire job is vibes.
@GeePawHill
Another is, if AI can make all industries more profitable, why are the AI companies losing money? They have all the AI.
They could fund themselves by asking the AI where there's a gap in the market, then using AI to create a super-profitable company to take over that market and rake in the money.
If it worked as promised.
Which it doesn't.
@GeePawHill Work's answer has been... If a client becomes reliant on it, only we can operate it, not the client, because of how unweildy, flakey, and sensitive to change it is.
... That answer hasn't exactly increased adoption.
@GeePawHill it's not forcing if it's free! /s
@GeePawHill my feeling from work is that there seems to be a push from the top based on a feeling/vibe that somehow this will increase productivity and speed to market. I see nothing concrete in evidence. The extrapolation seems to be from narrowly defined uses of deep learning in certain technical areas.
@GeePawHill Because by and large people are bigoted against it?
@Newhereish So, by this answer, am I to understand that if *I* make a wonderful product that is unreasonably rejected due to the bigotry of others, the right thing to do is force it on the bigots so that they will come to understand the error of their ways?
@GeePawHill I mean, if it is a product that has the potential to end scarcity, yes, by all means do so.
@Newhereish So is it your belief that LLM-AIs have the "potential to end scarcity"?
@GeePawHill Clearly, you're not in management.
@GeePawHill being more productive is not necessarily correlated with enjoying or feeling good about your work. A skilled machinist suddenly being assigned to operate an automated CNC machine might be a lot more productive, and also miserable.
@karptonite a) That answer amounts to saying that a corporations production is more important than its employees' health, and b) LLM-AI is being forced in to *everything*, not just in to the workplace.
@GeePawHill Because that doesn't look impressive to shareholders. Humans are so 5 years ago, we all know robots are the future.