AI isn't useless. But is it worth it?

The article by Molly White, published on April 17, 2024, critically examines the use and implications of generative artificial intelligence tools. She acknowledges that while these tools can be useful in certain contexts, such as proofreading and coding, they are far from perfect and often require human intervention to correct errors. She also highlights the ethical concerns surrounding their use, including the significant environmental impact, the exploitation of underpaid contractors, and the potential job losses in various sectors.

White argues that the hype around AI often overshadows its limitations and the harmful ways in which it is being developed and trained. She also questions the value of tasks that AI tools are particularly suited to, suggesting that many of these tasks might not be necessary or beneficial in the first place. The author concludes by questioning the ethical implications of using these tools, given the significant costs associated with them.

Key takeaways:

Generative artificial intelligence tools can be useful in certain tasks but there is a significant gap between their actual utility and the claims made by AI companies.
While AI tools can be useful in tasks like proofreading and coding, they are not capable of generating novel ideas or replacing experienced developers and writers.
Despite some useful features, AI tools have significant limitations and their use must be carefully monitored for errors.
The author questions the ethical implications of using AI tools given their huge costs, including high energy consumption, reliance on underpaid contractors, and potential job displacement.

AI isn't useless. But is it worth it?

Key takeaways:

Comments (0)

Newsletter