[supplied_demand]

Funny enough, the large AI companies run by CEOs with MBAs (Alphabet and MSFT), seem to be slow-playing AI. The ones promising the most (Meta, Tesla, OpenAI, Nvidia) are led by strict technologists.

Maybe it’s time to adjust your internal “MBAs are evil” bias for something more dynamic.

[chrisweekly]

In what way is MSFT "slow-playing" AI?

[supplied_demand]

They are slow-playing the promise of what AI can, should, and will accomplish for us.

Nadella said this yesterday at YC’s AI Startup School:

== “The real test of AI,” Nadella said, “is whether it can help solve everyday problems — like making healthcare, education, and paperwork faster and more efficient.”

“If you’re going to use energy, you better have social permission to use it,” he said. “We just can’t consume energy unless we are creating social and economic value.”==

https://www.thehansindia.com/tech/satya-nadella-urges-ai-to-...

[chrisweekly]

Thanks. I agree w the things Nadella said there. But it rings pretty hollow, given how hard every MSFT product is pushing AI. What would it look like if they weren't "slow-playing" it?

[supplied_demand]

That’s fair. I was looking more at the promises of what it can/will do than integrating it into products. The MBA CEOs seem more focused on solving business problems and the tech CEOs are more focused on changing the world.

This is all an aside from the original point, which was that I think it is unfair to pin the proliferation and promises made about AI on some cabal of MBAs somehow forcing it. The people building the tools are just as at fault, if not more.

[bird0861]

Right, I can't sustain for a moment the idea that the guy who fumbled Recall like a stack of wet fish dipped in baby oil is actually a wise sage full of caution. I permit myself one foolish idea a day and that's not going to be the one for any day of the week.

[Eddy_Viscosity2]

Indeed, it is often the case that what powerful people say is very different from what they do.