Likewise, "this tool which makes researchers and officer workers 5-10% more efficient" is, like, a big deal, but does not justify the current market valuation of Nvidia, so instead we have to keep trying to invent god or the market implodes.
Likewise, "this tool which makes researchers and officer workers 5-10% more efficient" is, like, a big deal, but does not justify the current market valuation of Nvidia, so instead we have to keep trying to invent god or the market implodes.
Well, and you've got companies bragging about this (gift link) "Since May, BenchSci has cut 23 per cent of staff – about 83 jobs – as it goes all-in on adopting generative AI to do work formerly done by humans" It's doing contract review, that'll be fun ... www.theglobeandmail.com/gift/03017b5...
guess we'll find out?
“Format a bibliography from the footnotes in this paper” is a great use for it, honestly.
From what I hear, "make this a CSV" works surprisingly well, but I do wonder how much little fixes someone telling me "surprisingly well" papers over.
The standard has to be "does it save time" without introducing horrible errors - if you have a source document, checking the output is there.
It’s one of the things I use it for. Or to find anomalies in large csv datasets. It’s also decently good at making heat maps. (All the above with a human in the loop, of course).
Yes, I know it can be done in Python/R/whatever, but I am not allowed to install those on company computers.
It’s great with standard forms. I’ve used it to create PRD’s (product requirement document) Invoices and such
“Vectorize this code that I wrote” or “help me with this regex” are also good.
now you have two problems
Again - automate improving something you already understand and know that it works.
LLMs can be good if it is easy to verify the correctness of their output
I think that’s where having domain knowledge already helps making LLMs helpful - you can catch clear challenges and nudge it along paths from your experience. Tbf I wish people thought critically about internet posts …. Generally. Overly trusting the internet is a bad idea.
westlaw has a plugin now for ms-word that automatically generates a table of authorities for a brief and honestly it works great
Zotero.
Many, many of my students report that trying this results in hallucinated entries that they have to go through carefully and prune out & it’s easier to just do it themselves
I’ve already copied out the footnotes here. Hallucinations are much less frequent with set sources.
You’re not wrong, but I watch LLMs fuck this up all the time.
Oh I mean, check it. It’s just soulless and mindless and I’ll take the speed up.
as much as I bash AI, did that once extracting a bibliography from a paper with footnotes and I admit I was impressed how well it did, just a few tweaks needed
I’m doing this for personal note-taking, not for something I’m handing in.
I take notes like I’m doing HVI hunting. Bibliographies are great for this.
It never seems to speed me up…but that’s probably on me.
Honestly? Zotero already does this and the only fuckups or hallucinations that it generates are mine and mine alone.
I have Zotero, its free!
AI can even make workers less effective. A study found that specialists got worse at detecting cancer by themselves after they had used AI for awhile. Apparently their skills decayed rather quickly. time.com/7309274/ai-l...
And yes, the stock market valuations of AI firms are scary high. www.cbc.ca/news/busines...
They could easily build some special-case parsing to the chatbot so it can't be tripped up by easy word games, and the other features the older of the voice assistants had that made them actually useful, but that isn't bringing about the Machine Messiah so
I'll note that even this faint efficiency is extremely dubious and what actual objective testing I've seen so far is that it makes AI-using employees *feel* more efficient when in fact they are greatly *less* efficient.
Did they have AI replace the PR person who placed this story?