It’s a wave of sewage, few users want to ride it in the first place
It’s like they created a very good phone tree and are trying to shove it into everything that never had or needed a phone tree in the first place.
Funny you mention a phone tree, something that’s been hit by AI. It’s actually been around longer as voice recognition that finds a close match to a keyword, but in theory AI should be able to take a request and break down what is actually needed.
I haven’t run across an AI version that works well. I don’t know if that’s because the voice recognition part is still bad, or if they’re using Co-pilot (since I know how it mangles simple requests in text).
Yeah it really feels like an LLM should work better than a phone tree for that, but every time I actually encounter one it’s so so much worse.
If Microsoft wasn’t run by tools, they’d see the gap Google and Apple have left behind by locking down their eco systems.
They could be the hero we need by saying we’ll make the software and you fully own your device like pc / windows.
But of course they won’t, and will just shoot themselves in the dick.
Just like when they ditched explorer we were all like yaay! Then instead of attaching to Firefox they just became another chromium cuck.
Why would anyone take your shitty browser that’s just a skin of chrome…
Again, they had the chance to take the pro customer lane and succeed, but they were too inept.
You didn’t miss the “mobile wave”. You purposely gave up. Idiots.
True. As much as I hate to admit it, the Windows phones were actually pretty good.
Had they not botched app adoption and then immediately given up, they could have done fairly well.
The more logical explanation is that AI is not a wave like the Internet and Mobile, but it is instead a wave like cryptocurrencies, NFTs and tulip bulbs.
If there’s one thing that almost 3 decades at or near the forefront of Tech has taught me is that “novel” is not the same as “better”, and that of all the times a novel technology was pushed by insane amounts of hype, only a handful turned out to match the hype and the ratio of good-ones to bullshit has become much worse in the last 2 decades as the Tech Startup sector fully morphed from Techie-driven to Financeer-driven.
On hype alone “AI” (as in, what’s called now AI for the public, rather than the ML domain) stinks of greed-driven bullshit and the more one analyses the Technical details of LLMs and the Mathematics of it as well as of the improvements over time, the more painfully obvious it becomes that it’s not at all AGI or a path to it, rather it’s an overhyped attempt at it that turned out to be the wrong path. (All of which would’ve been absolutelly fine and a big Scientific step forward if it weren’t for the greedy financeer class and grifters pushing, purelly for their own personal enrichment, for people and companies to adopted it for doing things it’s not suitable for)
My only complaint here is that there is a lot of very, very valid use cases for “AI” specifically “Agentic AI”.
We (including myself) may not like a lot of those uses because it devalues my fellow workers but it does not change the fact that it works.
The problem is everyone needs to be so goddamn polarizing and god forbid we have a mature honest discussion about the tools being built and how they are changing society as we know it.
We should be discussing and pushing for UBI across the world for decades now as youth unemployment is already at dangerous levels in continents like Africa (lol of course we don’t care because black people) but no instead we have asshats pushing a narrative of “AI bad”. It’s not. It has many purposes. Smarter people know this and it’s why it isn’t going away and the train is not going to stop if you don’t pull your head out of your ass.
/rant
I can’t wait to dip out of society and find somewhere in the middle of nowhere to live a quiet life with minimal technology in my life. I’m done with all of you. I stand by what I’ve said to my mum many times over the years. I hate people. I love persons.
The list of valid use cases for AI is bound by “what is the worst possible consequence of a mistake done here”, because the statistical distribution of mistakes in terms of severity of consequences of things like Agentic AI is uniform (meaning, they’re just as likely to do the worst mistakes with the nastiest consequences as they are doing the smallest mistakes), which it is not the case with humans who make more of an effort and give more attention to avoiding catastrophic mistakes and also have a “this is stupid” (i.e. don’t put glue in pizza, don’t tell a suicidal person to kill themselves) recognition capability which also stops a lot of the nastiest mistakes.
This is something which is not noticeable to most people because most people don’t have deep enough process experience in at least one expert domain and process analysis experience, to upfront recognized anything beyond the “in your face” elements of using AI (or using anything, really) in a process.
Very few people would think “what’s the risk profile for this business of giving this thing these responsabilities”.
So they seriously overestimate what are valid use cases for AI, something that the hype around it also pushes for: not a single AI vendor will ever mention just “error distribution” or anything close to it.
Obviously, when the thing blows up catastrophically by doing something which for a human is “obviously a bad idea”, THEN people recognized that AI is unsuitable for that, but by then its often too late.
(Easy example: lawyers using AI to make submissions to the Court and ending up disbarred because those submissions “quoted” invented case law).
So I don’t expect Agentic AI to fuck society up by taking a large fraction of the jobs, I expect Agentic AI to fuck society up by an accumulation over time of random catastrophic mistakes that kill people and collapse otherwise stable companies, mistakes that humans in such positions would never do or at least be way less likely to do.
It’s going to be akin to death by cummulative poisoning.
The list of valid use cases for AI is bound by “what is the worst possible consequence of a mistake done here”
Its not because humans make those mistakes all the time. It doesn’t need to be %100, it just needs to be like 95% to be better than humans.
When human makes a mistake, they learn, they continue to enrich humanity, they make a blueprint how not to make the same mistake again, if not for humanity, but at least for themselves. It also fuels some creativity so one mistake might lead to something good later.
When a mistake generator makes a mistake, it’s just another mistake in a pile of mistakes that only worsen our collective human experience.When human makes a mistake, they learn, they continue to enrich humanity
Very few humans do that. Vast majority is far more sloppy than any AI slop I’ve ever seen.
Don’t fall into this nihilistic bullshit, if humans weren’t capable of learning we wouldn’t be here in the first place. This narrative isn’t true and doesn’t help. It’s all invented by religions of old to better control humanity, and it wasn’t true then and isn’t true now
Do bees learn? Like how to deal with mites? Or do they just die off every 45 days and only get replaced by bees who accidentally happen to be a little better at dealing with mites?
