Ah, so what you meant was there are no companies that know what they are doing?
No, what I meant was in my post. There is no such thing as a “good company”. Part of a company may be good. Some or most of the people may be good. An entirely good company though is not a thing.
If you re-read my post I said “someone” who knows what they are doing, I was not referring to companies. So do you deny that such a thing as a subject matter expert exists? AI can be an excellent assistant to SMEs but not a substitute for them. By the way, who defines what a good company is? The stock markets and customers.
1 Like
I won’t be re-reading any post thanks. Apologies if you’ve not read it previously but I’m sight-impaired and the nature of that means I’ll have read your post almost certainly more than you have. That aside…
We have discussed the idea of “someone” previously on this thread and concluded that it’s an inappropriate task for an individual. It has to be a group and within that group, ironically, there is an argument that the last thing needed is AI expertise. The process requires people capable of identifying whether there is a problem to be solved by AI in the first place before looking at things like what data has the AI been trained on and what are the issues with the data which would need to be added into the mix. All of that before you look at cost, speed, outcomes, contractual issues, union issues and so on.
At present there is negligible evidence of any company actually doing all of that. Some do some of it but we’re already seeing that doing some of it and then leaping ahead with “Woo look what our AI can do for you” has produced awful outcomes. The number of large and small charities removing AI application sifting software is just embarrassing for example. On a global scale there have been plenty of chat bots with a very short lifespan indeed and so on.
“Company” is a broad term and doesn’t include just those who have shareholders. Customers do indeed help define “good” but not whether a company is good. They merely create an impression of the tiny part they have interacted with.
Not hard to name a global brand who are shockingly bad in terms of delivering their particular product on time, to price, with minimal to no environmental impact (clearly a key factor which will help define “good” going forward given the costs of data centres in every sense) but they have outstanding customer service. There is near zero relationship between how bad they are and what the public think of them.
Yes, excellent point. For example in the context of my pre-AI career, SMEs with a strong review framework for approvals and a key corporate culture of effective decision making.
That is quite some distance from high volume triage type decision making with a focus on costs that I believe has been highlighted earlier in this thread.
I took my Labrador to the vets and they have just introduced AI based consultation transcribing .
( the practise asks each customer for permission to use it)
The vet I spoke to about it said that is only been in use for 2 weeks and her. comments were as follows
The vets love the convenience and it saves about 5 mins of each consultation (which is 20 mins) BUT does then need a couple of minutes of ‘sense checking’ before the voice to text output is saved to the patient’s notes and the audio deleted.
2 Likes
I can’t resist.
How did they get the dogs consent?
3 Likes
More importantly, how did they get the cats consent. 
4 Likes
Dreamies!
1 Like
She used her AI enabled brain to listen , understand and agree 
1 Like
Er, except for thermodynamics of overproduction on a finite planet.
1 Like
Good point!
JonathanG
1 Like