• OwOarchist@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 days ago

    and why is it mandatory?

    Some companies’ C-suites have gotten their heads so far up their asses on AI that they’ve entirely forgotten about making money and the only metric they care about now is whether their company is using AI more than their competitors.

    It’s no longer about ‘how do we use AI to make money?’ – it’s about ‘how can we spend money to increase AI usage?’

    • kunaltyagi@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 days ago

      LLM seem magic if you don’t have expertise in an area. Middle management and above don’t have any technical expertise in their domain do they love the 40% (a bit worse than the 80-20 rule) that LLM enable.

      Report: “Project is delayed because we are fixing a deadlock issue” Mgmt to LLM: “My project is delayed because of deadlock issue. What should I do?” LLM: “Oxidise your codebase and use Rust” Mgmt to team: “We should stop writing in C++ and use Rust 100%” Le Team has no rust experience and a 15 year old codebase in C++

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        The “sycophantic overconfident oracle” tone the biggest companies deliberately give LLMs has to be one of the most problematic single decisions of the century.

        Multi-turn, decoder-only LLMs are neat tools in the ML toolbox, but oracles are not what they are.

        But now that it’s stuck, that perception is going to fuck shit up in management hierarchies forever.