311–320 of 392 posts
If i need to use AI I will paste text into ChatGPT.com or wherever, i dont need Word to constantly annoy me with it.
Of course this guy is “surprised”, his whole division will be shut down if this fails.
Aside: The cookie consent banner on this website is “unlawful”. I cannot choose to reject the cookies.
Insofar as "All ambiguity is resolved by practitioners at the sharp end of the system", a tool that resolves ambiguity higher up the org chart is going to be less impressive to those of us who resolve ambiguity day in and day out. What I mean to say, is that we know our way around the tools and this is why we're not impressed when somebody else uses AI to find their way around the tools.
Of course it is unimpressive when someone does something familiar to you, that is subjective. That same thing could be framed as impressive, to someone else, such as the person who is now able to do the unfamiliar as if it is familiar.
The other bias would be to assume that there aren’t unfamiliar things (you don’t know every tool every made, therefore you may potentially benefit from using AI to help with learning new tools).
Another bias is to assume AI is only good for learning something unfamiliar. There are ways to contain generative coding that scale, in some contexts. Likewise there’s probably use cases even for power users, like organizing messy desktop icons into semantic clusters (automating tedious tasks), summarizing running processes, limiting engagement with brain rot, etc.
The image and video generation capabilities of AI is the most unimpressive part of AI's! It's the LLM's that are the most inpressive. Those might, just might, even make some sense in an OS, since plenty of people are happy to outsource a quick email or script to AI. Hell, what if your OS had a built-in AI to troubleshoot bugs for you? That might even conceivably be an improvement.
> Over in the comments, some users pushed back on the CEO's use of the word "unimpressed," arguing that it's not the technology itself that fails to impress them, but rather Microsoft's tendency to put AI into everything just to appease shareholders instead of focusing on the issues that most users actually care about, like making Windows' UI more user-friendly similar to how it was in Windows 7, fixing security problems, and taking user privacy more seriously.
I'm sure adding AI to Windows would make privacy problems even worse. Not to mention agentic AI could create a whole new class of security problems if not implemented carefully.
Insofar as "All ambiguity is resolved by practitioners at the sharp end of the system", a tool that resolves ambiguity higher up the org chart is going to be less impressive to those of us who resolve ambiguity day in and day out. What I mean to say, is that we know our way around the tools and this is why we're not impressed when somebody else uses AI to find their way around the tools.
Anyone who has successfully completed a self-motivated project all on their own knows that the problem definition changes when the knowledge gaps go away. Sometimes even entire classes of solutions become pointless and their value goes from seemingly huge to nothing at all.
If we look into the past it's the difference between wanting to selfishly reconfigure the earth with physics-defying and godlike brute force creating massively worse and life-threatening problems... versus just building the shelter and infrastructure we now consider obvious and far less silly with smarter technology than just brute force and magic.
That's what I think is going to happen to all this pointless scaffolding currently being called "AI". It's a category of software that is completely unnecessary in a world where people are more experienced and better educated.
I can't stand interacting with these AI buddies that feel like simpletons. Stuff like Claude Sonnet 4.5 however i use for work daily.
Tech enthusiast will judge ai based on what it gets right, we’re interested in what “can” do. Everyone else will judge ai based on where it fails, they are interested in what “problems” it “does” solve.
> a fluent conversation with a super smart AI that can generate any image/video is mindblowing to me.
They see: A computer software generally unreliable and unable to accomplish basic tasks