• BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    People are touting this like it’s a good thing or something, presumably this means a 30% reduction compared to the previous staffing this would have require. 30% is a lot.

    • ElTacoEsMiPastor@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think it’s perceived as good? (curious, why would it be?) Just that it’s disingenuous to market it as AI. Everyone and their mother now has “”“AI”“” 🤷‍♂️

        • ElTacoEsMiPastor@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Oh, i get it! Yeah, 30% is a considerable percentage.

          Where I work (text-based customer support), a few weeks ago I stumbled upon a spreadsheet analysing that they could “save” 25% in wages by implementing GPT-4.

          It may still be mostly humans on the line, but 1 out 4 of us may get the boot.