The more I see relating to 'AI' the more a load of utter crap it seems to be.

What has flipped me into starting a discussion is to look at Google with a search of "index linked UK annuity rates". Now it's pretty obvioous the sort of result I was expecting.

What do I get in my Google results...?



Really? Is that what anyone would expect? It's useless AND incorrect.

We now have AI Electric Toothbrushes, AI Washing Machines. I start to wonder if the jAguAR advert was AI generated...

It seems to be mainly used for generating fake photos and mindless memes. Not that those things actually ARE 'AI' as opposed to just programs and algorithms with no learning capability at all. Claiming somthing is 'AI' doesn't make it 'AI'....

So really, has anything new actually been invented relating to AI? What is the invention underpinning the hype. What are the patents? Who owns them.

It's appearing to me to be nothing more than hot air and dumbing down... In some cases it's losing customers, as anyone who has chatted to the FedEx 'AI assistant' will appreciate. Companies are replacing people with cheaper, but incapable chat bots that are utterly unable to resolve problems.

So being serious now, what are the things where AI is actually making a difference?

As a software engineer I have a fairly good grasp of such things. And importantly the ability to differentiate between actual 'AI' and things that are not, but are still labelled as 'AI'..like my toothbrush example.

Every closed loop algorithm (such as monitoring and targetting adverts on social media) isn't 'AI'. It is frequently 'just an algorithm' with some results storage. That isn't 'AI'...

A lot of investment doesn't prove worth. As we have seen with Cold Fusion, the Hydrogen Economy, the 'Metaverse', Battery Gigafactories etc. etc. Tech is litered with such examples of money pits and Crash & Burn stories.

So that's why I'm posing the question, albeit rather flippantly. I'm trying to understand what, if anything, the REAL examples are and will they have the productivity claims that they are priced in to have.

And at the moment, I'm not really seeing much.

Part of the problem is the use of the word "intelligent".

There have been household appliances marketed as "intelligent" for years. Like the wall heater that turns itself on at certain pre programmed times of day or when the room temperature drops below a certain level, or off above a certain temperature - all based on what the human has programmed it to do. To be fair, that is really clever - compared to an appliance that only has an on/off button that you have to remember to hit with your finger as and when...

Same with calculators, which have been around for decades and we take for granted, being able to do insane sums that only Rainman could do in his own head, with no need for batteries and costing about 4 quid. That is amazing.

What is being called AI just seems like the same principle. Pre programmed responses to human requests, albeit - where chatgpt and illustrators are concerned - with scope to appear creative by being able to mine the internet for words and images.

But the more complex the "thinking" required, the more the shortcomings emerge. Google maps really is pretty shit at times for long distance journeys where you want to avoid massive traffic jams. Despite having a massive network of information at its disposal it will often take too long to adjust and advise you to change course. I've got to the point where I have a sixth sense for when I need to ignore it and am often right. Self driving cars will take you off a cliff if there's a confusing object in its view, like an advertising hoarding showing a road ahead.

None of this is thinking in the true sense. It isn't the same as general intelligence. It is useful, interesting and a good thing in principle, but has its limitations, isn't anywhere near as clever as people are making out and doesn't in any way resemble what the human mind can do. Despite what geeky, lazy dreamers like ben ski claim, AI isn't going to save us from needing to think and solve our own problems. Unless there are some seriously big leaps forward that are not currently apparent.

So I think AI is good, but also crap compared to the hype being spread. It is also turning people into cretins and IQs are falling more and more. These useful tools are making people very lazy and their brains are doing less and less. How many people can actually read a paper map now the way we used to do whilst also driving? Cars will now bleep a warning if you drift over the line on the road - anybody who needs that shouldn't be driving in the first place. The ability to remember things diminishes as we always have these phones there as a constant reference. Attention spans are limited. Why write or draw when you can get your phone to do it for you? Add in the problems of politicisation, bias, propaganda. AI seems to make US crap - it brings us down to its level. This is more a philosophical point about how it affects people. Turning them more and more into useless morons.

I'm not expecting any miracles with this; there seems to be a lot of hot air involved sucking in large numbers of dollars, and the concerns around AI are not so much that it will take over the world through its cunning and evil genius, but that we will destroy ourselves by becoming more and more stupid and dependent on what is artifical rather than real. Perhaps the winners will be the people who remain more in touch with the real, or at least analogue, world. This is already well in progress...

Also many other mundane or repetitive tasks. Low level jobs in accountancy, law, bank clerks, back offices etc. All can be replaced by AI eventually. You will have some workers overseeing it. But many will be replaced.

Think of all the money that is being saved. So not only will you see big tech companies profit from it all, you will see many corporations increase profit margins.

It will accrue to shareholders. Young people should be heavily invested as they will more likely to suffer from their jobs, so need to hedge.

Chatting to a friend who’s a GP last week, he’s pleased he’s due to retire soon, feels his job and the majority of GPs will be undertaken by AI in the not too distant future