The Age Of Mediocrity
We recorded 7 claims from this post. 5 were checked against evidence. 2 can’t be checked. 4 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (7)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“The output from ChatGPT or any other generative AI feels utterly soulless”
What we tested: Output from ChatGPT or any other generative AI feels utterly soulless.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“They crave a new Industrial Revolution where simulations of human beings do a shittier job slightly faster without needing to be paid to do it, or with a human being as a handler that must constantly refine and buff up work in a way that will likely take more time than having a human do it in the first place.”
What we tested: AI work that requires a human handler to constantly refine it will likely take more time than having a human do the work in the first place.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Artificial intelligence allows the modern executive to recategorize more and more labor as “unskilled” because a computer could theoretically do it, even if the work product sucks.”
What we tested: Artificial intelligence allows the modern executive to recategorize more and more labor as 'unskilled' because a computer could theoretically do it, even if the work product sucks.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
“They will gladly replace artists, writers and any other role that they believe can be automated in a heartbeat.”
What we tested: Companies will readily replace artists, writers and other roles they believe can be automated with AI.
What happened: The report documents dismissal of the Spanish editorial staff and replacement with automated translations. It supplies a completed editorial substitution; no direct employer announcement was obtained. (Ars Technica, )
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“A reasonable person might think that companies wouldn’t lower the quality of their output just to theoretically save a dollar, and they would be wrong.”
What we tested: Companies are willing to lower the quality of their output via AI to theoretically save money.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“I believe we are going to see a surge of companies desperately piling money into AI with little regard for the consequences, leading to several smaller versions of the $440 million software glitch that destroyed financial services firm Knight Capital.”
What we tested: A surge of reckless corporate AI investment will lead to several smaller-scale costly failures akin to the Knight Capital software glitch.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
“Either way, we are entering an era where companies will begin testing how much they can automate away the human element of their business, and how much of the customer experience they can trim off until they start losing money.”
What we tested: We are entering an era where companies will begin testing how much they can automate away the human element of their business, and how much of the customer experience they can trim off until they start losing money.
Held from this post (4)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: AI hallucinates regularly and is getting worse, yet executives are adopting it as fast as possible regardless of whether it makes sense.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: As of August 2023, AI cannot realistically replace a writer or a writers' room.
- The two reviews read the claim differently