4 ms·

> Say you have two assistant employees. One that reads the reports and one that uses AI to summarize the content. You are sitting in a high value meeting. You o

> Say you have two assistant employees. One that reads the reports and one that uses AI to summarize the content. You are sitting in a high value meeting. You only can have one assistant with you in the meeting. Which one would you pick, the persons that read the reports or the person who only used AI? I would take the person who only used AI. Why? Your fictional problem has the silent assumption that if you are in a high value meeting, you shall act more conservatively (i.e. reduce risk for reliability, even if you loose chances/opportunities). But this is rather a statement that the respective person acts on a risk-averse profile. I rather have a risk-affine profile. Because it is likely that everybody else in the meeting has a risk-averse profile, it is very likely that if I act on the "non-conservative" choice and I am right, I will have a huge advantage. On the other hand, if I act on the conservative choice, I won't have any advantage over the other participants. Since I am risk-affine person, I am willing to risk it. :-)

yndoendo 2mo ago
There was no time frame from reading the report and AI summary to having to apply the report is stated. It could be one hour to 30 days in between or more. There was no statement if the meeting was scheduled or impromptu. Client(s) might have saw you in public or at an event. Or at a trade show and there the report only applies to the single client versus to many clients. There was no statement of report ownership. All parties might have access to it. There is a chance that AI lied / hallucinated the summary. Only to know would be taking time to read the report and validate it. AI only consumption has shown to reduce retention of information compared to reading the core content. Ever have someone tell you why they want AI? I have, it was because they do not want to read the reports.

yndoendo 2mo ago

There was no time frame from reading the report and AI summary to having to apply the report is stated. It could be one hour to 30 days in between or more. There was no statement if the meeting was scheduled or impromptu. Client(s) might have saw you in public or at an event. Or at a trade show and there the report only applies to the single client versus to many clients. There was no statement of report ownership. All parties might have access to it. There is a chance that AI lied / hallucinated the summary. Only to know would be taking time to read the report and validate it. AI only consumption has shown to reduce retention of information compared to reading the core content. Ever have someone tell you why they want AI? I have, it was because they do not want to read the reports.