It has to have a usage though. We ran a long proof of concept on voice recognition as in voice-to-text, for office workers and had good results once the software learned to recognise correctly.
I think the best cases were 20-30% increased productivity for a single worker, but it was ultimately useless because we use open offices, so the project got scrapped.
Without context, this statement means nothing new should ever be done. It's a terrible axiom. Even within the context of this question, if we used this reasoning for the next 500 years we would surely never solve it.
Oh sure, but that's why you have the context. My point is that the time gap between a tool like this becoming technically possible and someone executing it successfully will be incredibly small. So the chances of the current moment in time being in that gap is tiny.
I think the best cases were 20-30% increased productivity for a single worker, but it was ultimately useless because we use open offices, so the project got scrapped.