I work for a contact center software company. There are definitely some valid use cases for agentic ai and LLM’s but most of the stuff being attributed to the latest wave of AI is stuff that’s already been possible for a decade at least. The new tech open up a few good use cases but they are definitely incremental rather than revolutionary.
We have found it useful for summarizing interactions, doing evaluations on interactions that would have no evaluation otherwise, and highlighting and summarizing relevant passages in knowledge articles for people on interactions with customers and for customers themselves via the web. It does have value, just a small fraction of that which would be needed to justify the investment being made and the valuations it’s getting.
That’s not a revolutionary change, though. It’s a useful tool sometimes, nobody denies it, but this financial speculation and forced deployment has meant that the biggest impact it’s had is the ease with which one can spread disinformation and generate slop for monetization. Both of those have undergone a revolution, that was my point.
This is why I think LLMs have made the world worse even if I don’t buy the fear-mongering. Regardless of the costs to train LLMs, the costs of having those tools available are worse than the benefits. The amount of extra work bug bounty programs have had to do thanks to AI is crazy.
Come to think of it, there are black markets for selling computer security vulnerabilities between nation-states. Maybe our governments can start flooding those with AI generated security exploits. That’d be funny.
This was a really great read. The numbers don’t lie: 7 companies each independently invested 100 bn in AI and have seen little revenue in return (relatively speaking). When overlaying that on top of its impact on the us stock market as a whole, once the veil has been lifted that this is not leading to super intelligence, a bubble will burst and the entire economy will feel it.
That doesn’t mean “nothing to see here, move on.” It means that AI isn’t the bow-wave of “impending superintelligence.” Nor is it going to deliver “humanlike intelligence.”
It’s a grab-bag of useful (sometimes very useful) tools that can sometimes make workers’ lives better, when workers get to decide how and when they’re used.
This is the part that is overlooked when discussing anti-ai hype: these tools are very useful, but they appear only useful to the skilled laborer wielding them, instead of the investor claim that they will be replaced.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
I work for a contact center software company. There are definitely some valid use cases for agentic ai and LLM’s but most of the stuff being attributed to the latest wave of AI is stuff that’s already been possible for a decade at least. The new tech open up a few good use cases but they are definitely incremental rather than revolutionary.
The only industries revolutionized by this latest generation of LLMs is botfarms and content slop peddling
We have found it useful for summarizing interactions, doing evaluations on interactions that would have no evaluation otherwise, and highlighting and summarizing relevant passages in knowledge articles for people on interactions with customers and for customers themselves via the web. It does have value, just a small fraction of that which would be needed to justify the investment being made and the valuations it’s getting.
That’s not a revolutionary change, though. It’s a useful tool sometimes, nobody denies it, but this financial speculation and forced deployment has meant that the biggest impact it’s had is the ease with which one can spread disinformation and generate slop for monetization. Both of those have undergone a revolution, that was my point.
That’s true. I agree that’s the only area its revolutionized.
This is why I think LLMs have made the world worse even if I don’t buy the fear-mongering. Regardless of the costs to train LLMs, the costs of having those tools available are worse than the benefits. The amount of extra work bug bounty programs have had to do thanks to AI is crazy.
Come to think of it, there are black markets for selling computer security vulnerabilities between nation-states. Maybe our governments can start flooding those with AI generated security exploits. That’d be funny.
This was a really great read. The numbers don’t lie: 7 companies each independently invested 100 bn in AI and have seen little revenue in return (relatively speaking). When overlaying that on top of its impact on the us stock market as a whole, once the veil has been lifted that this is not leading to super intelligence, a bubble will burst and the entire economy will feel it.
This is the part that is overlooked when discussing anti-ai hype: these tools are very useful, but they appear only useful to the skilled laborer wielding them, instead of the investor claim that they will be replaced.