Comment on 95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Finds
BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I think there are real productivity gains to be had but the vast majority are probably leaning into the idea of replacing people too much. It helps me do my job but I’m still the decision maker and I need to review the outputs. I’m still accountable for what AI gives me so I’m not willing to blindly pass that stuff forward.
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
Yeah. The dunning kruger effect is a real problem here.
I saw a meme saying something like, gen AI is a real expert in everything but completely clueless about my area of specialisation.
As in… it generates plausible answers that seem great but they’re just terrible answers.
I’m a consultant I’m in a legal adjacent field. 20 years deep. I’ve been using a model from hugging face over the last few months.
It can save me time by generating a lot of boiler plate with references et cetera. However it very regularly overlooks critically important components. If I didnt know about these things then I wouldn’t know it was missing from the answer.
So really, it cant help you be more knowledgeable, it can only support you at your existing level.
Additionally, for complex / very specific questions, it’s just a confidently incorrect failure. It sucks that it cant tell you how confident it is with a given answer.