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

95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

thedailyadda.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 445 posts

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#141

Post by paulddraper »

dsr_ wrote: post #86
jawns wrote: post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

Pro-tip: don't write the summary at all until you need it for evidence. Store the call audio at 24Kb/s Opus - that's 180KB per minute. After a year or whatever, delete the oldest audio. There, I've saved you more millions.

This works unless you want to automate something with the transcripts, stats, feedback.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#142

Post by Terr_ »

frozenport wrote: post #38
JCM9 wrote: post #16

We are entering the “Trough of disillusionment.” These hype cycles are very predictable. GPT-5 being panned as a disappointment after endless hype may go down as GenAI’s “jump the shark” moment. It’s all fun and games until the bean counters start asking for evidence of return on investment. GenAI folks better buckle up. Bumps ahead. The smart folks are already quietly preparing for a shift to ride the next hype wave…

Yo what’s the next hype cycle that smart folks like us should be working on?

The next hype-cycle might not relate to software. I'm thinking of the (smaller, shorter) phase where "nanotechnology" was getting slapped onto everything including laundry detergent.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#144

Post by actsasbuffoon »

jawns wrote: post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

That’s the thing. There’s value in AI, it’s just not worth half a trillion dollars to train a new model that’s 0.4% better on benchmarks. Meta is never going to get a worthwhile return on spending $100M on individual engineers.

But that doesn’t mean AI is without its uses. We’re just in that painful phase where the hype needs to die down and we treat LLMs as what they really are; an interesting new tool in the toolkit that provides some new ways to solve problems. It’s almost certainly not going to turn into AGI any time soon. It’s not worth trillions. It’s certainly worth something, though.

I think the financials on developing new frontier models are terrible. But I’ve already built multiple AI projects for my company that are making money and we’ve got extremely happy customers.

Investors thought one company was going to win the AI Wars and make a quadrillion dollars. Instead it’s probably going to be 10,000 startups that will build interesting products based on AI, and training new models won’t actually be a good financial move.

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#145

Post by shawabawa3 »

doubled112 wrote: post #74
jawns wrote: post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

At work we've tried AI summaries for meetings, but we spent so much time fixing those summaries that we started writing our own again. Is there some training you applied or something specific to your use case that makes it work for you?

My guess is that the summaries are never actually read, so accuracy doesn't actually matter and the AI could equally be replaced with /dev/null

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#147

Post by nuker »

jawns wrote: post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

> recently switched to using AI to transcribe and write these summaries

Did users knew that conversation was recorded?

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#148

Post by TimCTRL »

jampa wrote: post #42

The biggest mistake people are making is treating AI as a product instead of a feature. While people are doing their work, they don't think, "Oh man, I am really excited to talk with AI today, and I can't wait to talk with a chatbot." People want to do their jobs without being too bored and overwhelmed, and that's where AI comes in. But of course, we cannot hype features; we sell products after all, so that's the sta…

I like this take, in fact i feel a little uneasy when i see startups mention "MCP" on their landing pages! Its a protocol and its like saying we use HTTP here.

I could be wrong but, all in all, buy a .com for your "ai" product, such that you survive the Dot-ai bubble [1]

I Love LLM's though!! Amazing math and tech.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble

Re: 95% of Companies See 'Zero Return' on $30B Generative AI Spend

#149

Post by simmerup »

amluto wrote: post #130
jawns wrote: post #56

Full disclosure: I'm currently in a leadership role on an AI engineering team, so it's in my best interest for AI to be perceived as driving value. Here's a relatively straightforward application of AI that is set to save my company millions of dollars annually. We operate large call centers, and agents were previously spending 3-5 minutes after each call writing manual summaries of the calls. We recently switched to…

I’d like to see a competent AI replace the time that doctors and nurses spend tediously transcribing notes into a medical record system. More time spent doing the actual job is good for pretty much everyone.

Until it hallucinates and the AI has written something wrong about you in your official medical record
Post reply on HN