this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
993 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

58184 readers
3119 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The new global study, in partnership with The Upwork Research Institute, interviewed 2,500 global C-suite executives, full-time employees and freelancers. Results show that the optimistic expectations about AI's impact are not aligning with the reality faced by many employees. The study identifies a disconnect between the high expectations of managers and the actual experiences of employees using AI.

Despite 96% of C-suite executives expecting AI to boost productivity, the study reveals that, 77% of employees using AI say it has added to their workload and created challenges in achieving the expected productivity gains. Not only is AI increasing the workloads of full-time employees, it’s hampering productivity and contributing to employee burnout.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 37 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Looking like they were doing something with AI, no joke.

One example was "Freddy", an AI for a ticketing system called Freshdesk: It would try to suggest other tickets it thought were related or helpful but they were, not one fucking time, related or helpful.

[–] Hackworth@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ahh, those things - I've seen half a dozen platforms implement some version of that, and they're always garbage. It's such a weird choice, too, since we already have semi-useful recommendation systems that run on traditional algorithms.

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 11 points 1 month ago

It's all about being able to say, "Look, we have AI!"

[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

As an Australian I find the name Freddy quite apt then.

There is an old saying in Aus that runs along the lines of, "even Blind Freddy could see that....", indicating that the solution is so obvious that even a blind person could see it.

Having your Freddy be Blind Freddy makes its useless answers completely expected. Maybe that was the devs internal name for it and it escaped to marketing haha.

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I actually ended up becoming blind to Freddy because of how profoundly useless it was: Permanently blocked the webpage elements that showed it from my browser lol. I think Fresh since gave up.

Don't get me wrong, the rest of the service is actually pretty great and I'd recommend Fresh to anyone in search of a decent ticketing system. Freddy sucks though.

[–] MentallyExhausted@reddthat.com 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That’s pretty funny since manually searching some keywords can usually provide helpful data. Should be pretty straight-forward to automate even without LLM.

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 6 points 1 month ago

Yep, we already wrote out all the documentation for everything too so it's doubly useless lol. It sucked at pulling relevant KB articles too even though there are fields for everything. A written script for it would have been trivial to make if they wanted to make something helpful, but they really just wanted to get on that AI hype train regardless of usefulness.

[–] Static_Rocket@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

TFIDF and some light rules should work well and be significantly faster.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

It's bloody amazing, here I am, having all my childhood read about 20/80, critical points, Guderian's heavy points, Tao Te Ching, Sun Zu, all that stuff about key decisions made with human mind being of absolutely overriding importance over what tools can do.

These morons are sticking "AI"'s exactly where a human mind is superior over anything else at any realistic scale and, of course, could have (were it applied instead of human butt) identified the task at hand which has nothing to do with what "AI"'s can do.

I mean, half of humanity's philosophy is about garbage thinking being of negative worth, and non-garbage thinking being precious. In any task. These people are desperately trying to produce garbage thinking with computers as if there weren't enough of that already.