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

241–250 of 445 posts

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

#241

Post by ssharp »

dsr_ wrote: post #221
andix wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a follow-up call of a customer. They are referring to earlier calls and the call center agents needs to check what it was about. So they can skim/read the transcripts while talking to the customer. I guess it's really hard to listen to transcripts while you're on the phone.

That would be awesome! But in fact, customer call centers tend not to be able to even know that you called in yesterday, three days ago and last week. This is why email-ticketing call centers are vastly superior.

I've always guessed that they are able to tell when you called/what you called about, but they simply don't give that level of information to their frontline folks.

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

#242

Post by Spivak »

b8 wrote: post #171
IgorPartola wrote: post #34

What are the actual use cases that can generate revenue or at least save costs today? I can think of: 1. Generate content to create online influence. This is at this point probably way oversaturated and I think more sophisticated models will not make it better. 2. Replace junior developers with Claude Code or similar. Only sort of works. After all, you can only babysit one of these at a time no matter how senior you…

AI Customer Service is very frustrating to work with as a end user.

I mean look, if the customer service department is just trying to frustrate you into not contacting them then AI is just a new tool in the belt for that. Sad, but improvement for them is explicitly worse for you.

But if you're actually trying to provide good customer service because people are paying you for it any paying per case then you wouldn't dare put a phone menu or AI chat bot in-between them and the human. The person handles all the interaction with the client and then uses AI where it's useful to speed up the actual work.

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

#243

Post by deadbabe »

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…

If GPT-5 had been released last year instead, they could have probably kept the hype manageable. But they waited too long and too greedily, and the launch fell flat. And in some cases even negative as I’m seeing some bad PR about people who got too attached to their GPT-4o lovers and hate the new GPT-5.

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

#244

Post by LPisGood »

spogbiper wrote: post #76
IgorPartola wrote: post #34

What are the actual use cases that can generate revenue or at least save costs today? I can think of: 1. Generate content to create online influence. This is at this point probably way oversaturated and I think more sophisticated models will not make it better. 2. Replace junior developers with Claude Code or similar. Only sort of works. After all, you can only babysit one of these at a time no matter how senior you…

I am working on a project that uses LLM to pull certain pieces of information from semi-structured documents and then categorize/file them under the correct account. it's about 95% accurate and we haven't even begun to fine tune it. i expect it will require human in the loop checks for the foreseeable future, but even with a human approval of each item, its going to save the clerical staff hundreds of hours per year.…

> its going to save the clerical staff hundreds of hours per year

How many hundreds of hours is your team spending to get there? What is the ROI on this vs investing that money elsewhere?

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

#245

Post by [deleted] »

highwaylights wrote: post #28
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…

I wouldn’t be surprised if 95% of companies knew this was a money pit but felt obligated to burn a pile of money on it so as not to hurt the stock price.

[deleted]

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

#246

Post by orphea »

jordanb wrote: post #140
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…

We use Google meet and it has Gemini transcriptions of our meetings. They are hilariously inaccurate. They confuse who said what. They often invert the meaning "Joe said we should go with approach x" where Joe actually said we should not do X. It also lacks context causing it to "mishear" all of our internal jargon to "shit my iPhone said" levels.

Oh, that's what happening. I thought my English is just terrible :(

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

#247

Post by mattlondon »

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…

Perhaps just a trough of disillusionment for OpenAI. Anthropic and Google keep delivering.

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

#248

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#249

Post by baal80spam »

resiros wrote: post #224

Here is the report: https://mlq.ai/media/quarterly_decks/v0.1_State_of_AI_in_Bus... The story there is very different than what's in the article. Some infos: - 50% of the budgets (the one that fails) went to marketing and sales - the authors still see that AI would offer automation equaling $2.3 trillion in labor value affecting 39 million positions - top barriers for failure is Unwillingness to adopt new tools, Lack…

> Lots of people here are jumping to conclusions. AI does not work. I don't think that's what the report says.

Well...

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"

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

#250

Post by ethagknight »

andix wrote: post #201
dsr_ wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Imagine a follow-up call of a customer. They are referring to earlier calls and the call center agents needs to check what it was about. So they can skim/read the transcripts while talking to the customer. I guess it's really hard to listen to transcripts while you're on the phone.

Im imagining my actual experience of being transferred for the 3rd or 4th time, repeating my name and address for the 3rd or 4th time, restating my problem for the 3rd or 4th time... feels like theres an implementation problem, not a technological problem.

Quick and accurate routing and triage of inbound calls may be more fruitful and far easier than summarizing hundreds of hours of "ok now plug the router back into the wall." Im imagining AI identifying a specific technical problem that sounds a lot like a problem that a specific technician successfully solved previously.

Post reply on HN