4 ms·
This is a really backwards reading of the data. It's like reading signups for internet service in the early years and going "more than half of households have n
by jajuuka 9mo ago
This is a really backwards reading of the data. It's like reading signups for internet service in the early years and going "more than half of households have not signed up for internet, looks like this internet thing is a flop." Of course you're not going to see overnight transformation. It's a snowball effect that eventually builds bigger and bigger.
- imiric 9mo agoUmm no, your example is a backwards reading of the data. From the PwC survey: > More than half (56%) say their company has seen neither higher revenues nor lower costs from AI, while only one in eight (12%) report both of these positive impacts. So The Register article title is correct. > It's a snowball effect that eventually builds bigger and bigger. That's just wishful thinking based on zero evidence.
- jajuuka 9mo agoHow exactly is it a backwards reading of the data? Or are you trying to insulting me? I never said the title is incorrect so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove. It's not wishful thinking. I actually looked at the trends instead of a single data point to reinforce my already decided conclusion. I also read the article and followed the percentages instead of assuming the values were all absolute. This is what I mean by reading the data backwards.