Slashdot Mirror
Executives Say AI Will Change Business, But Aren't Doing Much About It (axios.com)
American business executives expect artificial intelligence to have a large impact on their companies, but few are actually doing anything with AI, according to a new MIT- Boston Consulting Group survey. From a report: Key takeaways, per co-author and BCG senior partner Martin Reeves: Nearly 85% of the 3,000-plus executives surveyed expect AI will give them a competitive advantage But their adoption of AI isn't matching up: just 1 in 5 of the companies use AI in some way, and only 1 in 20 incorporate it extensively. "Less than 39% of all companies have an AI strategy in place," they wrote. The barriers for adoption include: access to data to train algorithms, an understanding of benefits to their business, a shortage of talent, competing investment priorities, security concerns, and a lack of support among leaders.
That's an interesting article summary there.
Sometimes, you feel like a nut. Sometimes you don't. Do-do-do...
No more employees! All work done by AI design and auto-coding, robot workers. Slash the corporate tax rate, allow free repatriation of offshore money, cash in the stock options!
>> Nearly 85% of the 3,000-plus executives surveyed expect AI will give them a competitive advantage
I am quite certain that at least 35.03% of them are wrong.
Pattern recognition is not 'AI'. Maybe when some actual AI is developed companies will adjust to it.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Hard AI does not exist. The giant neural nets that are Watson and Alexa and Siri are not true AI or anything that didnt exist 20 years ago. The only thing that's changed is hardware has gotten better. Back in the day in the late 90s ViaVoice took a $2000 computer to run and taxed it to the max. Today it wouldnt take up more than 1% of my system's resources but for some reason I'm still typing this on a vanilla keyboard...probably because the software is still the same garbage it was 20 years ago. Watson hasn't replaced oncologists. Alexa hasnt replaced my typing searches into Google. AI is still epic flame in practical applications. Just this weekend Slashdot had a story about AML software at HSBC so bad and generating so many false positives it crippled the banks small business operations. That's the state of AI today....
The cutting edge stuff now is building custom hardware to do some of the thing we've been doing in software to mimic stuff we've seen done in neurons. Good luck with that. Maybe in 30 years we will build a full cockroach brain in silicon. Right now...it's all still fiction.
for over fifty years. I can't believe people still fall for the lies. I started college in 1971, and the professors all claimed we shouldn't go into engineering because we would be replaced by AI. That certainly hasn't happened. Of course, that doesn't stop the dishonest scientists from lying in order to get more of that sweet grant money.
But desperately trying to sell pattern recognition as AI
Can someone give me the definition of AI? I ask because it keeps getting thrown around but when people get in to details they talk about pattern recognition, machine learning or data analytics. Not what I would consider AI. CTO seems to think that if a machine can read, say safety manuals, then it can make decisions on safety better then humans. We have yet to see this work.
Executives are scared of AI. They'll be the first out the door.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
They are built around problems.
that lets out many of our overly affluent senior executives, whose only skills seem to be selling out and sucking up
just saying
I think the reason few are actually doing anything with AI is that it hasn't been turned into a product yet. Ask a financial analyst how they intend to use AI to improve their forecasts, and they will give you a blank look. Sell them a product that you feed a bunch of data into and a forecast spits out, that uses AI under the hood, and they will be happy to buy it. But they don't have the ability to start from scratch.
Kind of like a study asking "Why aren't house builders using superconductors?" Because they have no idea how to put them to use until they get out of lab settings and get built into products.
Executives [...] Aren't Doing Much [..]
I suspect the product support lines will be the first to use it, not because it's good, but because co's want to cut staff. It just has to kinda sorta work to make it tempting enough. It's one of the lowest barriers of entry due to low expectations since product support already sucks at a good many co's.
Table-ized A.I.
Since apparently nobody really knows what "AI" is:
https://qz.com/1067123/stop-pr...
saying an undefined quantity will accomplish something is a bit of a stretch.
AI joined the recent overhyped buzzwords: MOOC, 3DTV, AR/VR... When the dust will settle, a few will certainly use it, but we will hear much less about it.
how can they do anything?
In other news, surveys show that 85% of executives have no imagination and the attention-span of a gnat. They have no interest in what's happening next quarter, let alone what might happen in a year or two.
whatever BS is included in the latest best-seller business book summaries they read, or whatever they read in that airline magazine on their last flight (you know, the article that was sandwiched between Sharper Image ads for electrically heated dog sweaters and the ad for $500 per person steak dinners). They'll do something with it when one of their hired-gun management consultants tells them what they should do with it.
Good question. And question is the operative word. First IMHO true AI should be indistinguishable from I. Einstein thought computers were uninteresting because they did not ask novel questions. They still don't. An AI should be able to synthesize data sets and generalize across them, posit questions and set novel goals and elucidate tasks to reach them. An AI should be able to see what isn't and ask , "Why not?"
Currently, I see AI as just a marketing term for highly capable systems that can perform tasks that people have performed historically. I am not being flippant when I say that, though many of these tasks are performed by people who possess intelligence, the tasks themselves require little of it. (Or none of it.) Not to say that the tasks are simple or that the do not require high levels of skill and ability.
A deterministic system will perform a task as assigned. An artificial intelligence will say, "You know, boss, I have evaluated your request and I think there is a faster way to achieve the goal you defined. Shall I proceed as requested or do you wish me to elaborate on my observation? Coffee?"
"No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy