Remember that MIT study I wrote about that found that the overwhelming preponderance of AI projects fail? And I attributed the failure to bad management?
It seems there’s an article in Fortune captioned “An MIT report finding 95% of AI pilots fail spooked investors. It should have spooked C-suite execs instead.” It apparently said pretty much the same thing.
I don’t subscribe to Fortune so I couldn’t read the whole thing. Maybe if someone else does (or are better at hacking into it than I am), they could verify my supposition about the article.
This whole generative artificial intelligence frenzy reminds me of an old wisecrack about computers from fifty or more years ago: with the aid of a computer in a fraction of a second you can make a mistake that would have taken years to make by hand.
I’ve got another one that I do know the source for: “To err is human, to really foul things up requires a computer.” The newspaper columnistBill Vaughan wrote that in 1969.
I used to tell my students, The computer is not the work of the Devil, it is the Devil incarnate.
While I can see how AI can automate searches and correlations, I don’t see how rummaging through the accumulated detritus of human nonsense can lead to any truly productive results. The mean of a crowd is a harmonic mean, and the collective crowd is always stupider than its most stupid member.
By the way, Chinese use of AI is narrowly limited to optimizing well-defined operations, especially in manufacturing and transportation. That seems entirely possible.
I believe the technical term is Garbage In, Garbage Out GIGO.