4 ms·
The MIT report that found 90% of workers are regularly using LLMs at work, many of them even multiple times daily[1], somehow has become the spark of the recent
by Workaccount2 1y ago
The MIT report that found 90% of workers are regularly using LLMs at work, many of them even multiple times daily[1], somehow has become the spark of the recent explosion of "AI has failed" articles. Which is ironic, because it shows that the people we trust to write with integrity are either only reading the headlines or purposely misleading with their articles.
If that's the case, LLMs cannot replace these primary source summarizing clowns fast enough.
[1]https://nanda.media.mit.edu/ai_report_2025.pdf https://nanda.media.mit.edu/ai_report_2025.pdf
- an0malous 1y agoI use a notes app multiple times a day for work. Does this make notes apps worth $1T in global investments?
- scotty79 1y agoNo, because to replace a notes app you need pen and paper. But to replace LLM you need at least a human. There's literally nothing else. And humans don't come cheap.
- therealpygon 1y agoIf everyone is competing to be THE notes app, and there is an expectation for every person in the entire world to use said Notes apps for nearly all tasks in the future? Yea, it absolutely could deserve a global investment of roughly just 3% U.S. GDP. Moreover, isn’t it up to the people investing to decide that, rather than people who used ChatGPT once and then complained on the internet?
- mvdtnz 1y agoNo, it absolutely wouldn't justify that level of investment and if that was happening we'd have hacker news articles rightly calling the notes app bubble.
- PessimalDecimal 1y agoI'm more impressed that 10% can avoid it given how aggressively AI is being shoehorned into everything.
- jihadjihad 1y agoThe PDF is viewable here [0]; the link above doesn't take you there. And from that PDF, I'm not seeing anything that is incongruent with what is stated in TFA: From TFA: > To be precise, the report states: "The GenAI Divide is starkest in deployment rates, only 5 percent of custom enterprise AI tools reach production." It's not that people aren't using AI tools. They are. There's a whole shadow world of people using AI at work. They're just not using them "for" serious work. Instead, outside of IT's purview, they use ChatGPT and the like "for simple work, 70 percent prefer AI for drafting emails, 65 percent for basic analysis. But for anything complex or long-term, humans dominate by 9-to-1 margins." From PDF: > Tools like ChatGPT and Copilot are widely adopted. Over 80 percent of organizations have explored or piloted them, and nearly 40 percent report deployment. But these tools primarily enhance individual productivity, not P&L performance. Meanwhile, enterprise-grade systems, custom or vendor-sold, are being quietly rejected. Sixty percent of organizations evaluated such tools, but only 20 percent reached pilot stage and just 5 percent reached production. Most fail due to brittle workflows, lack of contextual learning, and misalignment with day-to-day operations. 0: https://mlq.ai/media/quarterly_decks/v0.1_State_of_AI_in_Business_2025_Report.pdf https://mlq.ai/media/quarterly_decks/v0.1_State_of_AI_in_Bus...
- goalieca 1y agoExecutives are telling their employees to use AI or else.. It feels like tokens are the new pieces of flair.