You’re probably right. I note, however, that this is territory that’s not been well-charted. So it’s not obvious to me just what to make of the inconsistency. It doesn’t (strongly) contradict Gioia’s main point, which is that LLMs seem to be in trouble in the commercial sphere.
I think the auther ment that there was a perception that it could replace millions of jobs, and so an incentive for business to press forward with their implementation plans, but that this would eventually back fire if the hallucination problem is insoluble.
Yes, but that ”generative AI can potentially replace millions of jobs” is not contradictory to the statement that it eventually ”may turn out to be a dud”.
I initially reacted in the same way as you to the exact same passage but came to the conclusion that it was not illogical. Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think so.
You’re right, and I don’t know what Gioia would say if pressed. But it might be something like: “Millions of people will be replaced by bots and then the businesses will fall apart because the bots don’t behave as advertised. So now millions are out of jobs and the businesses that used to employ them are in trouble.”
Seems contradictory to argue both that generative AI is useless and that it could replace millions of jobs.
You’re probably right. I note, however, that this is territory that’s not been well-charted. So it’s not obvious to me just what to make of the inconsistency. It doesn’t (strongly) contradict Gioia’s main point, which is that LLMs seem to be in trouble in the commercial sphere.
I think the auther ment that there was a perception that it could replace millions of jobs, and so an incentive for business to press forward with their implementation plans, but that this would eventually back fire if the hallucination problem is insoluble.
Perhaps, but that’s not the literal meaning of the text.
Yes, but that ”generative AI can potentially replace millions of jobs” is not contradictory to the statement that it eventually ”may turn out to be a dud”.
I initially reacted in the same way as you to the exact same passage but came to the conclusion that it was not illogical. Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think so.
You’re right, and I don’t know what Gioia would say if pressed. But it might be something like: “Millions of people will be replaced by bots and then the businesses will fall apart because the bots don’t behave as advertised. So now millions are out of jobs and the businesses that used to employ them are in trouble.”