Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. New study by the National Bureau of Economic Research: A survey of 6000 CFOs, CEOS throughout US, Europe, UK and Australia comes to the conclusion that businesses predict that "AI" will improve productivity by a whopping 1.4%.

New study by the National Bureau of Economic Research: A survey of 6000 CFOs, CEOS throughout US, Europe, UK and Australia comes to the conclusion that businesses predict that "AI" will improve productivity by a whopping 1.4%.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
27 Indlæg 16 Posters 27 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

    New study by the National Bureau of Economic Research: A survey of 6000 CFOs, CEOS throughout US, Europe, UK and Australia comes to the conclusion that businesses predict that "AI" will improve productivity by a whopping 1.4%. Truly earth shattering.

    https://www.nber.org/papers/w34836

    nakob@anarchism.spaceN This user is from outside of this forum
    nakob@anarchism.spaceN This user is from outside of this forum
    nakob@anarchism.space
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #11

    @tante Does this include the 100% productivity gains that electricity companies will have due to AI? 🤔

    ftranschel@norden.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • stockach@gruene.socialS stockach@gruene.social

      @tante

      Sounds like the never-ending story of nuclear fusion (the break-through is always just 10 years away).

      nilz@norden.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
      nilz@norden.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
      nilz@norden.social
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #12

      @stockach @tante

      I still hear that "we must learn how to use it right" , that AI keeps getting better and better but the organisations learning curve is too slow. Go visit a prompting seminar!

      Ha ha 🤡

      vladimir_lu@hachyderm.ioV 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

        Oh and most companies report no productivity gains in the last 3 years but that cannot surprise anyone by now.

        amorpheus@kind.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
        amorpheus@kind.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
        amorpheus@kind.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #13

        @tante The current purpose of AI goes beyond economics.

        ftranschel@norden.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

          New study by the National Bureau of Economic Research: A survey of 6000 CFOs, CEOS throughout US, Europe, UK and Australia comes to the conclusion that businesses predict that "AI" will improve productivity by a whopping 1.4%. Truly earth shattering.

          https://www.nber.org/papers/w34836

          q@goeppingen.socialQ This user is from outside of this forum
          q@goeppingen.socialQ This user is from outside of this forum
          q@goeppingen.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #14

          @tante not sure who created the study but it's wrong.
          I know incoming raged response of AI sycophancy with insults by backwood neckbeards

          tante@tldr.nettime.orgT 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

            New study by the National Bureau of Economic Research: A survey of 6000 CFOs, CEOS throughout US, Europe, UK and Australia comes to the conclusion that businesses predict that "AI" will improve productivity by a whopping 1.4%. Truly earth shattering.

            https://www.nber.org/papers/w34836

            ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            ftranschel@norden.social
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #15

            @tante I'd wager that even the 1.4 percent go away once you account for people simply behaving differently with AI available - and it obviously will turn negative once the skill dependencies are fully established for "power users".

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • q@goeppingen.socialQ q@goeppingen.social

              @tante not sure who created the study but it's wrong.
              I know incoming raged response of AI sycophancy with insults by backwood neckbeards

              tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
              tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
              tante@tldr.nettime.org
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #16

              @q you can check out the results and comments. What do you think the researchers did wrong? Did the CEOs lie?

              maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • amorpheus@kind.socialA amorpheus@kind.social

                @tante The current purpose of AI goes beyond economics.

                ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                ftranschel@norden.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #17

                @Amorpheus @tante That may very well be, but it is much harder to measure.

                This result alone is the nail on the coffin of scaling, because in order to offset the investment frenzy, not even ~10% net gains would be enough. And there is not even a *hint* that this'd be true for edge cases such as coding where arguably one could *assume* some real gains to be found.

                amorpheus@kind.socialA 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • nakob@anarchism.spaceN nakob@anarchism.space

                  @tante Does this include the 100% productivity gains that electricity companies will have due to AI? 🤔

                  ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                  ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                  ftranschel@norden.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #18

                  @nakob @tante Productivity != profitability.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • ftranschel@norden.socialF ftranschel@norden.social

                    @Amorpheus @tante That may very well be, but it is much harder to measure.

                    This result alone is the nail on the coffin of scaling, because in order to offset the investment frenzy, not even ~10% net gains would be enough. And there is not even a *hint* that this'd be true for edge cases such as coding where arguably one could *assume* some real gains to be found.

                    amorpheus@kind.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                    amorpheus@kind.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                    amorpheus@kind.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #19

                    @ftranschel @tante Yet knowing that ai is not profitable enough to legitimize the effort, they all continue their agenda. I wonder why. 🤔

                    Are they stupid or do they see revenue where the market does not?

                    Now this is just a thought, not a conviction...

                    If the current ai hype proceeds, it will become an unvaluable tool for worldwide surveilance and oppression.

                    ftranschel@norden.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • nilz@norden.socialN nilz@norden.social

                      @stockach @tante

                      I still hear that "we must learn how to use it right" , that AI keeps getting better and better but the organisations learning curve is too slow. Go visit a prompting seminar!

                      Ha ha 🤡

                      vladimir_lu@hachyderm.ioV This user is from outside of this forum
                      vladimir_lu@hachyderm.ioV This user is from outside of this forum
                      vladimir_lu@hachyderm.io
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #20

                      @nilz @stockach @tante Is a “prompting seminar” like a visit to an “untherapist” (where you shout loudly and randomly at passers by that you are perfectly fine)

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • amorpheus@kind.socialA amorpheus@kind.social

                        @ftranschel @tante Yet knowing that ai is not profitable enough to legitimize the effort, they all continue their agenda. I wonder why. 🤔

                        Are they stupid or do they see revenue where the market does not?

                        Now this is just a thought, not a conviction...

                        If the current ai hype proceeds, it will become an unvaluable tool for worldwide surveilance and oppression.

                        ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                        ftranschel@norden.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                        ftranschel@norden.social
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #21

                        @Amorpheus @tante

                        Conspiracies aside: In a bubble market, it *is* possible to transfer wealth even if there is *none* in the long run.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                          New study by the National Bureau of Economic Research: A survey of 6000 CFOs, CEOS throughout US, Europe, UK and Australia comes to the conclusion that businesses predict that "AI" will improve productivity by a whopping 1.4%. Truly earth shattering.

                          https://www.nber.org/papers/w34836

                          collimated_thought@defcon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                          collimated_thought@defcon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                          collimated_thought@defcon.social
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #22

                          @tante And yet "Despite $30–40 billion in enterprise investment into GenAI, this report uncovers a surprising result in that 95% of organizations are getting zero return." From an MIT study on the outcome of AI projects. https://mlq.ai/media/quarterly_decks/v0.1_State_of_AI_in_Business_2025_Report.pdf

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                            New study by the National Bureau of Economic Research: A survey of 6000 CFOs, CEOS throughout US, Europe, UK and Australia comes to the conclusion that businesses predict that "AI" will improve productivity by a whopping 1.4%. Truly earth shattering.

                            https://www.nber.org/papers/w34836

                            rainer_rehak@mastodon.bits-und-baeume.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
                            rainer_rehak@mastodon.bits-und-baeume.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
                            rainer_rehak@mastodon.bits-und-baeume.org
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #23

                            @tante I guess this already small increase mostly comes from people working longer working hours now because of the bosses' high expectations when introducing "#AI" tools.

                            Also see this related news: https://techcrunch.com/2026/02/09/the-first-signs-of-burnout-are-coming-from-the-people-who-embrace-ai-the-most/

                            tante@tldr.nettime.orgT 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • rainer_rehak@mastodon.bits-und-baeume.orgR rainer_rehak@mastodon.bits-und-baeume.org

                              @tante I guess this already small increase mostly comes from people working longer working hours now because of the bosses' high expectations when introducing "#AI" tools.

                              Also see this related news: https://techcrunch.com/2026/02/09/the-first-signs-of-burnout-are-coming-from-the-people-who-embrace-ai-the-most/

                              tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
                              tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
                              tante@tldr.nettime.org
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #24

                              @Rainer_Rehak Might be. Right now about half is just "firing people" (which then gets the rest to do what you described) and the hope for very marginal output increases.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                                @q you can check out the results and comments. What do you think the researchers did wrong? Did the CEOs lie?

                                maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.social
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #25

                                @tante @q this. It's a survey that asked for their opinions (partially). The CEOs and CFOs and other C-suite execs in these surveys surely have no clue what's going on in the daily life of their employees who have to actually work with all the AI stuff. The C-level guys don't even read their own email but have staff summarising them in PowerPoint's. So I'd say the data basis is very thin here...

                                tante@tldr.nettime.orgT 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.socialM maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.social

                                  @tante @q this. It's a survey that asked for their opinions (partially). The CEOs and CFOs and other C-suite execs in these surveys surely have no clue what's going on in the daily life of their employees who have to actually work with all the AI stuff. The C-level guys don't even read their own email but have staff summarising them in PowerPoint's. So I'd say the data basis is very thin here...

                                  tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
                                  tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
                                  tante@tldr.nettime.org
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #26

                                  @maxheadroom @q they do know (at least for the last years) the numbers: How much OpEx and CapEx are there in contrast to revenue. So They can pretty accurately say what happened in the past without knowing who works how

                                  maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                                    @maxheadroom @q they do know (at least for the last years) the numbers: How much OpEx and CapEx are there in contrast to revenue. So They can pretty accurately say what happened in the past without knowing who works how

                                    maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    maxheadroom@hub.uckermark.social
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #27

                                    @tante @q I still question their capacity to relate this to AI one way or the other. Nevertheless, the low value of expected increase is still telling. Given the cost and likely increase in opex by all the users.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • jwcph@helvede.netJ jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
                                    Svar
                                    • Svar som emne
                                    Login for at svare
                                    • Ældste til nyeste
                                    • Nyeste til ældste
                                    • Most Votes


                                    • Log ind

                                    • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                    • Login or register to search.
                                    Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                    Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                    • First post
                                      Last post
                                    0
                                    • Hjem
                                    • Seneste
                                    • Etiketter
                                    • Populære
                                    • Verden
                                    • Bruger
                                    • Grupper