What that first woman should have doneis point out what AI is doing brilliantly that would likely take huma an extremely long time to accomplish and which would have bored many of them into working while chemically impaired, leading to a huge amount of errors. I'm talking about things like analyzing the fragments of the Dead Sea scrolls byauthor according to handwriting analysis and then assembling the fragments or analyizint the Voynich Manuscript and coming up with worsening schizophrenia as the likely origin. AI has been useful at analyzinh language patterns. It has been far less useful at generating them.
Had she read the room and realized she was talking to arts and humanities grads, she would have gotten a much warmer reception.
The problem now is that it has become such a buzzword. It has been vastly oversold, especially to tech bros who seemingly don't understand its strengths and limitations any better thanlay people do. They only see something they think will allow them to dispense with paying workers to generate and maintain their software and have projected that across the board. In other words, the whole planet will become their Galt's Gulch, devoid of the rest of humanity since they won't need us any more. They have been unclear about what they're intending to do with us or who they're going to sell their products to.
Even if the techdudes try to turn AI into a master instead of a servant, the way China has, onsider just how much infrastructure AI will need in order to intrude country wide. That is its vulnerability, makiung it very vulnerable to sabotage. It can be, however, a powerful too.l in the arts and humanities as well as in most other areas were the work is stultifying, boring, and frustrating.
= new reply since forum marked as read