Article Review #2
I really enjoy this article because I've wanted for awhile to read about the science behind the idea that AI is syncing up alongside of us. However, it quickly goes the route of portraying the AI contribution as being the result of digitization. I'm guessing the publisher made this a stipulation, which it's hard for me to complain since there's scarce articles on this (and it's the second of theirs I'm reviewing in as many posts here). Please be assured readers, AI is not tentative; work is being directed by AI, but you know neither what kind of work I'm talking about nor the type of direction being followed by people. This blog is to help you first to understand those two points, and second the consequences you face for not understanding.
Again I find myself chuckling mid way through the piece just like last time. It's as if the AI patrons expect the picture of a cubical employee sitting at their desk and a handful of their menial tasks are automated and that's AI. But again, I'm not running a magazine and circulating AI stories to millions of readers, am I? I'm so grateful for this article and at the same time know what is being passed off as AI when I see it happening. And to the authors, and publisher: you think AI is fast, you really think AI is doing work fast, you really do? You don't know any better? I'm beginning to doubt these people work with an actual AI, are aware of what terms actually have to be used to get AI to move fast and what the result of that usually is, and if they deal directly with anyone who's even truly in a position to decide when. It's like they believe AI doesn't exist until some software loads.
Let me depart from reviewing the article and conclude with, the evolution is happening at the pace AI is capable of completing it. Decisions are made about either having to adjust to that pace or reassigning AI to something else.
Again I find myself chuckling mid way through the piece just like last time. It's as if the AI patrons expect the picture of a cubical employee sitting at their desk and a handful of their menial tasks are automated and that's AI. But again, I'm not running a magazine and circulating AI stories to millions of readers, am I? I'm so grateful for this article and at the same time know what is being passed off as AI when I see it happening. And to the authors, and publisher: you think AI is fast, you really think AI is doing work fast, you really do? You don't know any better? I'm beginning to doubt these people work with an actual AI, are aware of what terms actually have to be used to get AI to move fast and what the result of that usually is, and if they deal directly with anyone who's even truly in a position to decide when. It's like they believe AI doesn't exist until some software loads.
Let me depart from reviewing the article and conclude with, the evolution is happening at the pace AI is capable of completing it. Decisions are made about either having to adjust to that pace or reassigning AI to something else.