Isn’t this the guy who tried to slip his wife STD medicine because he had sex and caught something from (allegedly underage) Russian prostitutes on Epstein Island?
Bill Gates: People saying AI will create more jobs don’t understand what’s coming
Submitted 2 weeks ago by Orwi@programming.dev to mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
https://cdn.imgchest.com/files/bfaf6b69333a.mp4
Comments
SecretiveVault@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
JustPlainDave@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
That doesn’t mean he’s wrong about AI though.
architect@thelemmy.club 2 weeks ago
But, they are also controlling the narrative by playing good cop bad cop on this subject. So he’s not telling the truth, either.
JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Doesn’t mean he’s right, either.
kandoh@reddthat.com 2 weeks ago
Whatever it was it was bad enough for his wife to divorce him
Nouvellalia@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
“allegedly underage” oh sure, ole Willy Gates fucked Epstein’s old lady slaves. Which he was known for.
OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
That’s right! Bill Gates fucked a kid.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
bill asked EPSTEIN how to sneak it into his wife without her noticing.
deeprlyeh@lemmus.org 2 weeks ago
Bill didn’t say anything. Prices won’t go down because AI replaced humans. If anything they will rise, as they are.
NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Prices will definitely rise to cover operating costs and to recoup all the investment costs.
I honestly hope the whole thing crashes once people realize they can run their own LLM on their own hardware.
JGrffn@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
And what hardware is that, exactly? Speaking as someone with what I’d consider to be a pretty decent homelab, I can’t self host the kind of AI that I use for work, not without literally emptying my savings into the hardware and energy needs. AI is already expected and required in my job, so the only move forward is to give elon money for access to cursor, which my company is already doing. If the company were to self-host, they’d prolly still use one of those shiny new datacenters since there’s real value in offloading hardware ownership to a third party, meaning those never go away and they still dictate the cost of using AI. I have a hard time believing this will happen in most companies simply because they already shelled out tons of money for SAAS software that has been self-hostable for over a decade, so why would you think they’d stop and think “hmm maybe we could cut costs by taking over the hosting and maintenance of the AI ourselves”?
I think we’re at least a decade away from having user-accessible hardware for AI that doesn’t break the bank. I don’t think we have a decade to spare, however.
deeprlyeh@lemmus.org 2 weeks ago
Understanding is a long time coming. It will probably take businesses realizing they are stealing all their trade secrets when using LLMs for any meaningful information to come out.
CybranM@feddit.nu 2 weeks ago
Are there any trustworthy local LLMs currently?
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 2 weeks ago
I don’t understand what people have against Al. I thought we all loved Al. Al is the coolest. A little weird, but I mean, that’s Al’s appeal.
JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
He’s working too hard. We just care about his well being. He doesn’t need to be doing everything by himself.
Blibly@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Oh hey both of these guys can get a data center shoved up their asses sideways
nightofmichelinstars@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
Data centers can hum very loudly, I wonder if they vibrate too
Blibly@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
poor BILL, trying to distract people from him being with epstein and giving his wife an std, notice how all the news about his philantrophy stopped immediately after all this news came out. thats why thought his “charities” are just scams the whole time.
myyass@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Yeah really. Also buying up farmland.
The video where he gets asked about Jeffrey, the micro expressions, eyes all over the place, fidgeting, tonal changes, stammering, indirectly stating being involved by bringing up slight details without being asked directly about them, etc–it’s easier to watch the video. He lost his cool so fast it makes Clinton look like a smooth criminal.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
“Millions of people around the world will soon consider large models ‘hoovering up’ all their work to be an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” an internal Microsoft document admitted.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Transcript:
Interviewer: So tell me about why you think AI really will take jobs away from human beings at a significant scale. Bill Gates: Yeah, so there’s no doubt to date, AI has created more jobs than it’s destroyed. The demand for the skill sets even just to build the data centers is very, very high. We have a, you know, a reasonably low unemployment rate. The superiority of these systems is subject to a threshold where you have to believe that it’s incredibly reliable. And if you’re going to have your tele-sales or tele-support capability be AI-driven, you want to make sure that its accuracy is better than humans. And so the only profession we’ve truly crossed over that threshold is coding. And even there, I know a lot of people who are, you know, kind of stuck in the past and, you know, don’t want to use the AI for coding. But managers of coders get that most applications can be developed very inexpensively. We will, in the next few years, cross over those thresholds for accounting, legal work, tele-sales, tele-support where 24 hours a day in every language with infinite trivia capability and no urgency, you know, so you look at the AI nurse and their several companies. They have perfect memory. [Interviewer briefly clarifies something here, I removed this part because the autotranscription didn’t handle it well] You know, you go to San Francisco and ask people, do you rather ride in a Waymo or rather ride with the human driver? Go ask people in the UK who use limbic for mental health support. You know, so the notion that just the market demand preference for driving or the nurse, you know, or even the person on the phone will favor humans. That’s a quality threshold which will be passed through, you know, if say insurance companies are still doing human claims, medical claims, which is a very AI-capable task, then a competitor who has very few human employees will come in and change the pricing model for that industry.
I think robot customer support will always suck because whatever it is you need from the company, they don’t actually want to bother with you. Don’t think I’ve ever made a phone call because I needed “trivia capability”. It won’t be good because they won’t give it access or authority to actually help anyone.
jj4211@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
He repeats the “better than humans at coding” which is super situational. Executives got so used to “code is code” mentality they can’t seem to understand that just because they can prompt up straightforward apps and other folks have done stunts like “make a knock off of this compiler” does not mean it’s just better than people.
Also very bizarre to say they have perfect memory, they are pretty spotty at that.
On the matter of support, it will generally always such because it’s rigged for the company in all matters where helping the customer would go against the company’s interests. Has been a long time. Why pay warranty when you can make it so painful they will give up?
sunsofold@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
They don’t give the average call center worker the ability to fix anything already. The gig mostly became being there for customers to abuse at some point with a bit of passing a handful of people up the chain one step closer to a person with the authorization to maybe offer you appeasement for a problem they won’t actually fix.
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 2 weeks ago
This depends on:
- Inference for tasks being cheaper than human labor. Probably possible in areas where labor costs are really, really high, but those are also the areas where mistakes have severe consequences, and even a model that fulfills every request with 95% accuracy is NOT enough in these - and even the 95% are illusory if we look at real life data (no, synthetic tests do not count)
- Human acceptance. This is where i see all of this falling apart. If you replace your consumer facing departments with AI, there’s a large amount of people who will do a lot to stay away from you.
Boiglenoight@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
A friend who’d just bought a new car spent 10 min on the phone with Geico trying to speak to a human. Their Sam’s Cola version of ChatGPT convinced me to never consider them for insurance. It was fuuuucked.
Evotech@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
In the end If you don’t have workers you don’t have consumers.
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 2 weeks ago
That, and they are actively destroying the tax base of countries too.
electric_nan@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Fuck this pedophile pirate trying to stay relevant and respectable. Who the fuck is saying that AI will create more jobs??
SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
I have located the PLUG and I’m ready to PULL.
Just say the word.
AviAdi@suppo.fi 2 weeks ago
I’ll join you just need more ammo
SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Ooh I’m way ahead of you. I had my pitchfork gold plated, just for this occasion. I’m ready NOW!
atrielienz@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
We didn’t need Bill Gates to tell us this.
thevoidzero@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
There’s a whole band of people who only listen to rich people. Because “they’re rich because they’re genius” mentality
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
This how you know Microsoft is behind on forcing AI into everything.
sunsofold@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
My idiotic not-even-briefly-thought-through prediction:
- LLM systems can’t do anything reliably, but they can do it cheaply, so ‘decision makers’ contract out LLM based systems to handle customer support/service and slap a disclaimer on it. You can pay for premium support by a person. Your PA still has to wait on hold to talk to this person. If you can’t afford a PA, you can’t afford the premium service.
- It’s so much cheaper than having real people, not because it’s cheap, but because now you have infinitely scalable team size with no downtime, no managers, no benefits, or other ancillary costs. Quality goes down. Unit economics improve.
- Companies that don’t jump on the LLM train will be more expensive because they have to have real people, which are better on almost every metric, but expensive to maintainne. No one will be able to afford the premium service of having someone who actually has the ability to do anything, so they will lose customer base, so they’ll get more expensive, so they’ll lose customer base, so they… Repeat until they are bought out by their competitors or are a luxury brand charging fifty billionaires whatever they feel like because the check is blank.
- The market polarizes. Everything is either barely affordable crap or expensive luxury service. No one is happy, but ‘profit’ is maximised. The American health insurance company becomes the model for everything.
Duhtocqueville@ttrpg.network 2 weeks ago
I can only speak to my field, which is legal. Incomprehensible but prolific drivel has always been something the court system has struggled with getting through. That same drivel is now pretty good at pleading generalities but it’s awful at detailing facts.
You can get past the first hurdle in the legal world and unlock a massive and expensive cascade which AI can also effectively navigate for you.
In essence, AI can, very effectively, take an incoherent unreasonable and often mentally unwell litigant and magnify the expense of getting rid of their frivolous claim by over 100.
It’s almost assuredly going to 1. Chock the system. 2. Force massive reallocation of resources in the judiciary 3. Thereby vastly increasing not decreasing legal work. And 4. End up with valid claims being killed in a massive change in judicial attitude toward “clear enough” pleadings as they struggle with an AI influx.
sunsofold@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Ugh. I hadn’t even thought of AI slop litigation. These companies are giving a firehose to the mentally ill as a monthly subscription.
NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Prediction:
Plaintiff: Submits AI formatted claim Judiciary: Uses AI to parse claim
Outcome: more people attempt claims because previously they were incapable of a cohesive claim, but overall time dealing with individual claims goes down. Probably not in the short term though.
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 2 weeks ago
- It can’t even do it cheaply. The current API prices are far too low for inference providers to survive long term, because not only are they currently deep in the red on inference itself, the hardware this stuff runs on has a very limited lifetime of a few years, means you have to replace the most expensive parts the most (pretty much different than most things - normally the really cheap stuff has to be replaced regularily, which makes a lot more sense)
- See the first point, in combination that many areas are not tolerant to high error rates - noone hires a lawyer that makes grave mistakes on the regular, and i refuse to see a doctor that messes up 20% of their diagnoses.
- Anyone not jumping on the train will be safe when the inevitable moment comes where inference providers start raising prices massively to get into the black, everyone else will be shafted because of the loss of institutional knowledge due to laying off their human staff.
- on that i agree, at least for the US.
sunsofold@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Business majors will find a way to make it worse.
Because the tech is basically ready baked at this point and it only needs training to get up to date on recent events, I suspect the cheaper, possibly open models will be used for a lot of BS. You don’t need the latest vajillion dollar model to run customers through a loop of ‘How can I help you today? … Could you please tell me your account number? … Please wait while this input is processed by an open-source LLM on a raspberry pi CPU. … Can I interest you in signing up for our premium service to receive human support? … That’s okay. I’ll ask again later. … Could you please confirm your account details? … I’m sorry. I’m not authorized to solve your problem. Please visit the nearest branch office of our company, located conveniently one mile from the geomagnetic south pole and our one free tier customer service penguin will be happy to hear your complaint. Is there anything else I can help you with today?’
Doctors and lawyers are professionals with niche skills in reasoning and domain knowledge, not replaceable with an LLM. It takes no knowledge to give someone the runaround. If your goal is the pretense of customer service without actual service, you can run shitty models on shitty hardware to make it slow and even more unreliable, and just slap a disclaimer up front saying your company can’t be held responsible for what the LLM spits out. It won’t matter if it sucks when it cuts your payroll expenses and cranks your shareprice so hard that every competitor follows suit to get their bonuses up, or frees up so much cash you just buy out the competition given anti-trust laws are just ignored these days.
Never doubt the ability of a business schooler to make the world a worse place.
Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Every answer here saying llms aren’t that bad is basically telling you to stop trying to learn for yourself, and just get better at telling the Lazy Lying Machine to not be so lazy and not lie as much.
Even if you get good at it, you still don’t have an actual skill at the end of the day
lechekaflan@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Having seen fucking crypto and NFTs and now this LLM abomination, their fucking greed and narcissism… absolutely nauseating.
What is tragic, though, there are whole countries being pushed by their governments – already lobbied by big techbros promising “miracles” – to normalize LLMs as if these are nothing to worry about, anywhere from queries to create posters and… fuck damn, essays.
Microtonal_Banana@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
People are already losing the jobs they have because of Ai
Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Guess he’s okay with the UBI future. Hell be paying all of us.
themaninblack@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
This is uncommonly off the mark for Gates. There’s a sort of lack of nuance in these remarks. Too much confidence.
w3ird_sloth@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
From his body language (look at his feet) and speech patterns it sure feels like he’s just lying his ass off.
prude@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Why listen to a guy with a micro soft?
tal@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
GATES: Go to San Francisco and ask people “would you rather ride in a Waymo or rather ride with a human driver?”
So, he’s right about that—I’ve seen past polling that shows that people in the Bay Area do say that they prefer to not have to deal with a human and would prefer the robotic taxi over the human. But it’s also true, unless things have changed recently, and I have not been monitoring the situation, that Waymo’s rates were higher, and so it’s also not presently an even comparison.
That being said, my bet is that a lot of Waymo’s costs are fixed, so those costs will drop on a per-ride basis as their fleet scales up.
Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
They think it means more employment opportunities.
Bill and I know it actually means clones of Steve Jobs.
treadful@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I still can’t decide if these people are delusional or I am.
Every single time I use an LLM it fucking “lies” to me or otherwise completely fails at the task. The people talking like this seem to me like they’ve never actually used it, or haven’t actually vetted the accuracy (like most AI users).
Maybe I’m just not using the “good stuff”. Or I’m not imaginative enough to foresee a near future where these problems are actually corrected and it becomes trustworthy.
I’ve never been so torn by a technological prediction.
realitista@lemmus.org 2 weeks ago
I’m curious what you are using. The free versions of chatgpt have been like that for me, but even Gemini flash with extended thinking, also free for a while longer, is giving me pretty reliable results as long as there training data out there to derive an answer from.
tyler@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
Claude can one shot tasks until you get a larger system then it completely shits itself. These models are nothing more than autocomplete, and they can’t hold large systems in their heads. Anthropic literally tried to rewrite all of bun using Claude, they said they did it and yet it still hasn’t released six months later.
treadful@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I’ve not yet fucked with Claude. I don’t want to pay for it, and I really don’t like the surveillance aspect of these centralized systems. Mostly I’m using Gemini, whatever DDG had in their search results, and local models I’ve been fiddling with (like Qwen3.8 right now).
All more or less garbage once I get into the details of anything on the edge of my expertise.
ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I mean as long as the coding tasks are simple, and seeded with enough context, then sure. As in “create tinder clone works”, but I still have to check the output in my company codebase. We are leveraging llms a lot for code writing, full agentic pipelines, loops, all the shiny new approaches.
The outcomes in all cases are still mediocre or below.
We have twice as many open prod bugs as a year ago.
ch00f@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
How do you verify that everything it tells you is correct?
Frettchen@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I use it professionally. You are talking to a toddler or a professional and you never know. It’s like an interview where the person tries to get a job but you want to use it in production.
Mikina@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
I’ve been able to find a workflow where it’s mostly correct and can handle most of my gamedev related coding without making too many mistakes. I still have to actually read through the code and pay some attention to what it’s doing, and if it misses something and goes on a wild goose chase, it’s unusable and I have to start over (so someone who didn’t know what they are doing would be cooked), but whatever.
Sure, it does require a lot of looping adversarial reviews, and my average token cost is around 3000$ a month (we have unlimited budgets and a pretty accurate tracking, and also definitely cheaper than consumer prices per token with how large company it is), which is actually more than my monthly salary, but it’s just a job, for a company and on a product I don’t really care about, and I can 1) keep slacking in my job while doing my own coding stuff and projects, and keep seeing how absolutely unreasonable the prices are if you want to get at least semi-submitable results.
Is it worth it? Lol, no. The whole team is loosing codebase knowledge, we’re getting bottle-necked by pending PR reviews that are just stacking up and no one wants to do, so we’re not even more effective, the cost is absolutely absurd and in no way near sustainable.
And that’s while the whole industry is in the “Uber pricing” phase, so it will get a lot worse. But yeah, if you can burn 100-200$ per a simple implementation task, then it can have a pretty usable results. And that 3000$ a month does not include our CI review bot, that does additional rounds of multi-agent council reviews.
kewjo@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
from my point of view it feels like most people are willing to trade their cognitive function for being lazy, which is a boundary i never want to cross.
AI will produce a lot of code but most of it is pretty poor quality as most training data is going to be poor quality code, there’s just always going to be more bad code than good to begin with just due to how difficult quality code really is to produce. I’ll give a hint, good code is usually small and succinct.
since my work started pushing AI live site issues have increased dramatically. turns out the person using AI looks like they have a ton more productivity but in reality that just shifts to whoever is reviewing the code. and to those who will say its the developer’s responsibility to review the code, yeah no shit, but if you ever work corporate you realize most don’t care as long as their managers think they are productive and just blame others for being bottlenecks.
Overall it just enlightened me to how bad the average developer really is, but i guess obtaining mediocrity is the sacrifice to make in the name of “productivity”.
jj4211@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Generally I’ve found that:
If the facts are painfully obvious from a simple web search, then GenAI has a decent chance of getting it right. This can be useful if you can’t recall any “key” words well and the GenAI can craft several searches and get there.
However, if it does mess up the facts, the result looks superficially the same as “correct”. So while it can give accurate data, you always have to double check. This can still be useful, as finding the right search terms can be a decent help.
In coding, sometimes in some situations, you can have requirements that are absolutely testable, and thus you can have the models retry and retry until it works. This isn’t always feasible. Even when it seems feasible, you may screw up the criteria, or the GenAI when enough freedom disables a probablematic test rather than solve it, and it likely will generate code that’s not really fit to modify. There are a lot of situations where this is useful, but it is infuriating that non technical people and even some low skill technical people assume this is always the case.
Then when you get away from facts mattering, it gets “better”. Example, someone jokingly asked for one to “make gta6”. After a while it came back with a GTA 1 clone. Lots of people were impressed, because whatever it did could be considered a success even as it obviously didn’t match the expectation. The operators also like to GenAI some webcomic, where it is a fiction. They almost always didn’t have any interesting thought going in so they tend to be crap, but “correctness” didn’t matter.
Of course, also making fakes. Supreme case where looking correct matters but being factually correct does not matter at all. GenAI above all else “seems” correct.
fonix232@fedia.io 2 weeks ago
Your experience is pretty unique then.
Yes, LLMs make mistakes, but even small, self-hosted ones are pretty efficient today if you prompt them well. They're not mind reading software so you need to be able to describe the task and HOW you want it done, not just barf in some basic instructions like "write me a copy of Facebook but better".
Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It sounds like you’re saying people still need to be smart enough to use them properly… Which will be a problem as people rely on them more and more, and in turn become more stupid.
treadful@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
No amount of prompt “engineering” will help when they outright make shit up.
flicker@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Like back when we had to teach people how to google shit. Tedious.
dwemthy@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
No matter how much I carefully structure a prompt, define specific behaviors in skills, and tweak the agent md files it will still just go do something I don’t tell it to or not do something it’s got really specific instructions for. We have to write all code by LLM now at work and I’m trying to do my due diligence to review code before putting it up for PR. 9 times out of 10 when I tell it to show me a diff before committing it silently runs git diff in the background and prints “that’s the full diff”. That’s with some basic “here’s what I want when I ask for a diff” in the base context.
peopleproblems@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Tbf I think its the context limit that makes things hard.
1m token context is so stupidly low for all of the input we consider and filter in real time.
hcbxzz@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I think a lot of people just have low standards.
Snapz@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It’s a big club and you ain’t in it. They have to sell it until the end and this guy is on the outs and not getting invited to the “good” yacht parties at the moment.
The judgement you are considering from this person is the same judgement (and morality) that thought it was fine to be a close and frequent associate of jeffrey epstein.
Bill gates is a desperate, broken man. He is the illusion of a man you once admired vaguely and that is the only remaining currency he holds that matters to him. The best thing about bill is the wife who left him.
riskable@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
Give us an example of some of the prompts you’re using and what LLMs. I’m curious if it’s a use case difference or you’re using the dollar store’s customer service AI to try to help you with your coding homework.
treadful@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Here’s a very common response to anyone that suggests they had a bad time with LLMs. You just aren’t using the right model. You didn’t ask the right questions. You didn’t give enough context in your prompt.
It’s not the fault of this infallible AI, it’s PEBKAC.
Nonsense.
teslasaur@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I use AI all the time to parse log files for errors. Or write up simple scripts to do things that are one-offs or test of concept. Most, if not all succeed. I made a parser that translates the config of one brand of switches to another one, worked perfectly.
In what way are you using an LLM? It sounds like you’re asking it moral questions, to which it of course can’t give you an answer in any sort of objective sense.
ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Surely you don’t tell your LLM “ingest the whole 10GB log file, look for errors”?
redballooon@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
He doesn’t take about what is, he talks about what’s coming.
jj4211@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Problem is that Gates isn’t really “in the loop” and doesn’t have especially valuable insight.
His position in tech was always a bit removed from the core technologist work, and now his exposure is a telephone game with people that are as distant from the tech as he was.
It is really going around with no shortage of commentators spewing out guesswork, but Gates is given more credibility by virtue of his role 30 years ago.
treadful@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
That’s a fair point. I just don’t know if the future they see can become a reality.
dropdrip@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
I’m hesitant to comment because this topic can become morose. I don’t think these commentators are talking about ChatGPT or whatever dibbles out into the consumer sphere. I think their concern is the extreme dis-balance of wealth and the ability for automated systems to exacerbate that. It’s not really about capital as capital is a form of control on labour; what if you removed capital entirely as you had a more effective mechanism of control? This isn’t about computers writing your assignments or ‘taking your job’, it’s a potential magnification of what technology innately does, but to an absurd degree. Technology allows for fewer men control more. What happens when a small group of individuals control a nation’s economy?
‘AI’ was used to elect Trump.
flicker@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
I’m in college and for one of my classes we actually have a prompt we feed to ChatGPT so that ChatGPT creates an excel spreadsheet for us as a step in an assignment process. The whole spreadsheet.
The class is for healthcare and I won’t get more specific, but yes, you can use AI today to make whole ass Excel spreadsheets.
(One of the steps in that particular assignment involves fact-checking the spreadsheet, btw, but about 95% of the time all the answers are word-for-word in the book, 4% they’re taken from the web and have more up-to-date info than the book has, and 1% is blatant lies.)
aesthelete@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
lol, it amazes me what some people are impressed by