|
|
|
|
|
by burnte
497 days ago
|
|
> I think this post underestimates how the degree to which “what data is correct” is deeply contextual. I can't get anyone to listen to this point. I'm seeing plans going full steam ahead deploying AI when they don't even have a good definition of the PROBLEM much less how to train the AI to do things well and correctly. I was in a 90 minute meeting with some execs who were all high on ChatGPT Operators. He was saying we could replace 80 people at this company RIGHT NOW with this tool. I asked the presenter to type in one simple request to the AI, the entire demo went wildly off the rails from then on and the presenter wasn't even remotely bothered by that. People are either completely taken in by the marketing and believe like it's a religion, or they have solid, sensible concerns about reliability. But the number of people in category 2 is a smaller number than the true believers. |
|
The other issue is that the first group are labelled as innovative go-getters, while the second group are labelled as negative crusty curmudgeons and this has an impact on the careers of both groups.