Re: AI is actually quite useful, just not a universal panacea
"...there are situations where AI has proven useful..."
This. Exactly this. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I can already hear the flamethrowers being fired up in the background, but I'm going to say it again: I struggle to understand the intense, vitriolic hatred against all things AI-related among the Reg commentariat.
Yes, AI is over-hyped. That's a problem with the IT industry and IT manglement, not with AI itself.
Yes, AI is no more intelligent than a Windows Solitaire game. The fact the some people think it's actually clever is a problem with people's perception of it, mainly due to the fact that AI is a misnomer. We're not dealing with Artificial Intelligence but only with Simulated Intelligence. If it were referred to by the latter, there would be a lot more realism surrounding it.
Yes, LLMs (which are only a subset of AI as a whole) are being trained on content in ways that are at odds (to put it kindly) with existing copyright law as we know it. That proves we need new copyright paradigms that accept the reality of content being incorporated in an LLM, as opposed to content being redistributed as-is. AI is disruptive technology. This is nothing new. The media industry tried to make war on digital audio and video being distributed on the Internet when that technology first became available; yet now we're looking at streaming services obliterating previous means of content distribution. Similarly, AI will also necessitate some radical paradigm shifts. But that problem is one of inertia within the content industry and its reluctance to respond to radical changes, not with AI itself.
Yes, AI is still unreliable and prone to failures in catastrophic (and often hilarious) ways. Of course it is: the technology is relatively new and still evolving. That's a problem with over-eager early adoption of new tech and a lack of caution by the user, not with AI itself.
Yes, manglement has become delusional to the point where they use AI to decimate the workforce and in some cases rehiring said workforce at a lower wage. That's a problem with incompetence and greed in the boardroom, not with AI itself.
Yes, some believe that buzzcoding can replace real devs. That's a problem with corporate stupidity, not with AI itself.
And so on.
Nor is this anything new.
Let's set the Wayback machine to the late 1990s, when the "New Economy" was the be-all and end-all. Tiny start-ups were given millions to play with and companies who had never made a single product, let alone any profit, went IPO and became worth billions overnight. I wondered out loud in those days how that sort of nonsense could ever be sustainable. I was met with scorn: my questioning the viability of the New Economy clearly illustrated my complete lack of understanding of how it worked. It was all about the Internet, and E-commerce, and the Virtual Workplace, and Java replacing regular applications, and Wearable Computers, and the words "dot com" which, when tacked onto anything at all, would ensure Instant Magic.
Then the bubble burst. And not a moment too soon.
But strangely, the Internet is still here, bigger than ever. Working remotely is still here, bigger than ever. Java has not replaced traditional software, but it has earned its place in the IT market; just look at large financial institutions or, closer to home, something like Apache Netbeans. Wearable Computer tech looks even more ludicrous now than it did back then, but everyone has a smartphone in their pocket, often with more computing power than the average desktop in 1995. E-commerce is also still here, bigger than ever: many of us order more goods and services online than what we buy through regular outlets.
My point (yes, there is one!) is that once the hype wears of, as it inevitably will, the core of technology that it sublimated around will continue to exist and function, and it will find its proper, useful application, whatever that may turn out to be. AI is no different. The bubble will burst, the hype will wear off, reality will set in, there will be a shake-out in which the more vapid players in the market will go under, and that is all as it should be. But AI itself will persist. It's here to say. Just look at history.