Tom Fishburne | marketoonist.com
::: spoiler Transcript
-
A man sitting at his computer tells a woman A.I. TURNS THIS SINGLE BULLET POINT INTO A LONG EMAIL I CAN PRETEND I WROTE.
-
A woman sitting at her computer tells a man A.I. MAKES A SINGLE BULLET POINT OUT OF THIS LONG EMAIL I CAN PRETEND I READ. :::
35 Comments
edgemaster72@lemmy.world · 89 pts · 70d
And they'll claim productivity was increased on both ends
oce@jlai.lu · 13 pts · 69d
Reminds me of an economics joke about eating shit raising the GDP.
Whimsical418@aussie.zone · 21 pts · 69d
The one chat goes something like this?
Two economists are walking through a farm. One tells the other "hey if you eat some of that shit on the ground I'll give you $100". So the second guy does it, and the first one hands over the $100. A few minutes later they pass more shit, and the second guy says to the first guy "if you eat some of that shit I'll give you $100 too", so the second guy does it and gets his $100. After a while, the first guy says "wait, did we just eat shit for nothing? No one made any money" and the second guy replied "of course not, we added $200 to the GDP!"
kambusha@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 69d
Shit must be good! A million flies can't be wrong.
mlg@lemmy.world · 57 pts · 70d
That'll be ten thousand dollars and your water supply please
cash or card?
SharkWeek@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 51 pts · 70d
Rampsquatch@sh.itjust.works · 32 pts · 70d
And the end bullet point is also wrong!
Joelk111@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 70d
So was the long list.
13igTyme@piefed.social · 7 pts · 70d
It's like that game were you whisper into one persons ear and they pass in on. By the end the message is completely different.
Joelk111@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 70d
Except the telephone is just the LLM where you tell the LLM something and it regurgitates some BS.
OpenStars@piefed.social · 4 pts · 69d
Why did I read this as "piss in it"?
Maybe that helps with understandability even... 🤔
gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org · 0 pts · 68d
that has literally happened for billions of years, it's called evolution
WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 70d
Management loves AI because management's job is to write emails and reports, not to actually communicate meaningful information.
gaiussabinus@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 70d
Normalise terse and succinct communication and life will be less fucking stupid. The problem does not reside in the tool but in our garbage culture of waste.
jtrek@startrek.website · 13 pts · 70d
"Please run the formatter so the checks pass on the PR" is a perfectly fine and polite statement. Some people act like they're being attacked.
gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org · 2 pts · 68d
the problem isn't the verbose reports but the requirement of management that something needs to be done, which comes from the requirement that people earn a living wage in this economy. we need UBI
morto@piefed.social · 18 pts · 70d
The inverted compression algorithm
cannedtuna@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 70d
Is that the in to out method?
testaccount789@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 69d
*inverted lossy compression
floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 70d
It inflates text and the economy at the same time!
squaresinger@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 69d
It's like file compression, but the other way round.
Michal@programming.dev · 8 pts · 69d
And it's not lossless.
oce@jlai.lu · 5 pts · 69d
noisserpmoc
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 69d
The question is: the bullet point written and the bullet point read will differ.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 69d
Most of the time yes. But sometimes no. Only way to know for sure is to read the original point.
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 69d
It all comes down to communication theory...
gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org · 1 pts · 68d
well, no, you could also implement something like a checksum ...
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 68d
A checksum requires an exact match down to the character. It can still be accurate without being a character for character match.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 69d
that's the neat part - it's completely unknowable
buddascrayon@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 69d
The truly hilarious thing in this scenario is that the bullet point he wrote and the bullet point she gets will be completely different. Their communication will be literally lost in translation.
TxzK@lemmy.zip · 12 pts · 70d
So is that what they call "garbage in, garbage out"?
OwOarchist@pawb.social · 11 pts · 70d
And the one bullet point that comes out was not the one bullet point the original person put in!
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 70d
If a job can be done by AI it’s probably a bullshit job.
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 70d
David Graeber, rolling in his graever.
Avicenna@programming.dev · 3 pts · 69d
Decoder Encoder architecture
olafurp@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 69d
I predicted this 6 years ago. It's automating corpo email ceremonies. Now all we need is to turn this into a chat app for this.