Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

d3.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 282 posts

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#81

Post by flir »

iterminate wrote: post #74
hubraumhugo wrote: post #15

Well, this sounds like perfect tasks for GPT: "Participants responded to a total of 18 tasks (or as many as they could within the given time frame). These tasks spanned various domains. Specifically, they can be categorized into four types: creativity (e.g., “Propose at least 10 ideas for a new shoe targeting an underserved market or sport.”), analytical thinking (e.g., “Segment the footwear industry market based on…

> A confident GPT hallucination is almost indistinguishable from typical management consulting material... If you're measuring based on output, sure, but... the value of any knowledge worker is primarily driven by the input, that is, a client doesn't want "10 ideas" they want "10 [valuable] ideas [informed by the understanding of the business and the market they're operating in]". If a management consultant said "boa…

So you ask for 20 ideas and filter. Even if you throw away 19, it's still useful.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#82

Post by iterminate »

Centigonal wrote: post #43
dopylitty wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m starting to think there’s an LLM equivalent to the old saying about how everything the media writes is accurate except on the topics you’re an expert in. All LLM output looks to be good quality except when it’s output you’re an expert in. People who have no background in writing or editing think LLMs will revolutionize those fields. Actual writers and editors take one look at LLM output and can see it’s basically…

Gell-Mann Amnesia!

Gell-Bott Amensia.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#83

Post by toxik »

olalonde wrote: post #50

HN is so bad at predictions. Just a few months ago HN was awash with comments that confidently claimed LLMs were no more than stochastic parrots and unlikely to amount to anything. > I can't help but think the next AI winter is around the corner. [0] Yeah, right. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23886325

That comment is going to go down as a HN hall of fame like that guy who said Dropbox is trivially replaced by rsync or something.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#84

Post by devin »

cube00 wrote: post #54
vorticalbox wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhat agree, I know LLM have boosted my programming output mostly in writing jsdocs and pr descriptions. The things I don't really like doing

If your docs and PR descriptions can be generated off file diffs everyone's time could be better spent scanning the diff to come to the same conclusions. Consider using your PRs and docs to capture the answers to the usual why questions which LLM won't be able to do.

Ah yes, but that would require actual effort, and in the end is only going to serve to improve someone else’s model.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#85

Post by School-Cotton »

dopylitty wrote: post #22
mgaunard wrote: post #2

Says more about how useless BCG consultants are.

I’m starting to think there’s an LLM equivalent to the old saying about how everything the media writes is accurate except on the topics you’re an expert in. All LLM output looks to be good quality except when it’s output you’re an expert in. People who have no background in writing or editing think LLMs will revolutionize those fields. Actual writers and editors take one look at LLM output and can see it’s basically…

I honestly don’t understand how people can say LLMs are useless for coding. Have you tried ChatGPT 4, or are you basing this take on the obsolete 3.5? I’m a professional programmer and I think LLMs are extremely useful.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#86

Post by airstrike »

dboreham wrote: post #73
skybrian wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programmers don't think that, though, or least not all the time. You could say similar things about Stack Overflow, and yet we use it.

For any managers reading: Chat GPT and Stack Overflow are not the same kind of thing.

Indeed they're not. And GPT-4 tends to outperform SO in my experience.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#87

Post by vsareto »

adeelk93 wrote: post #49
fragmede wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The frustrating one is when you've been telling management something for months (if not years), and the consultant comes in, and their report says what you been saying, and only then does the company finally do what you've been saying all along! Coulda saved the company 5-figures just listening to me. sigh politics.

Why is that frustrating? I find it validating

It's frustrating because you don't get money or credit for the idea.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#88

Post by Xcelerate »

olalonde wrote: post #50

HN is so bad at predictions. Just a few months ago HN was awash with comments that confidently claimed LLMs were no more than stochastic parrots and unlikely to amount to anything. > I can't help but think the next AI winter is around the corner. [0] Yeah, right. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23886325

We’re going to have legit AGI that can outperform humans in every way and HN will still find something to complain about. I love the tech news on here, but the constant cynicism on everything is exhausting.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#90

Post by jprete »

flir wrote: post #81
iterminate wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A confident GPT hallucination is almost indistinguishable from typical management consulting material... If you're measuring based on output, sure, but... the value of any knowledge worker is primarily driven by the input, that is, a client doesn't want "10 ideas" they want "10 [valuable] ideas [informed by the understanding of the business and the market they're operating in]". If a management consultant said "boa…

So you ask for 20 ideas and filter. Even if you throw away 19, it's still useful.

They’re all bad ideas, though.
Post reply on HN