On my recent visit to London I was struck by how many of the advertisements in the Tube were selling AI. They fell into two groups, one aimed at CEOs and the other at marketing people. This is typical, the pitch for AI is impedance-matched to these targets:
- The irresistible pitch to CEOs is that they can "do more with less", or in other words they can lay off all these troublesome employees without impacting their products and sales.
- Marketing people value plausibility over correctness, which is precisely what LLMs are built to deliver. So the idea that a simple prompt will instantly generate reams of plausible collateral is similarly irresistible.
In
The Back Of The AI Envelope I explained:
why Sam Altman et al are so desperate to run the "drug-dealer's algorithm" (the first one's free) and get the world hooked on this drug so they can supply a world of addicts.
You can see how this works for the two targets. Once a CEO has addicted his company to AI by laying off most of the staff, there is no way he is going to go cold turkey by hiring them back even if the AI fails to meet his expectations. And once he has laid off most of the marketing department, the remaining marketeer must still generate the reams of collateral even if it lacks a certain something.
Below the fold I look into this example of the process Cory Doctrow called
enshittification.