They were fairly up market, but that helps push the perception that chatbots are a sign of a cheap / low-quality brand, which is an association I'm very happy for people to build.

I will *never* use AI for something like that.

I do not understand the risk assessment (or lack thereof) of the whole AI using market, let alone the critical ethical issues on so many fronts.

Ability to do the job without AI is a fundamental skill.

The ability to use AI to help you do the job more quickly and more effectively is also an increasingly useful skill.

But without the fundamental skill you're just shoveling slop.

If you feel comfortable sharing, where is "local"? One of my kids is an unemployed entry level engineer.

Edit: Oh, Puerto Rico. I'll suggest it to him.

If you're facing a large region with unstable internet you might want to check out 802.11ah HaLow.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ah

It's using the same unlicensed 900Mhz band as meshcore, but carries IP traffic at tens to hundreds of megabit over a kilometer or two using omnidirectional antennas.

Having an unstable power grid goes beyond losing this month’s groceries. It is the surprise bill everyone faces. These affect decisions like having diesel generators, battery backups and solar panels.

The people running comms towers are facing those decisions too. Which leads to crappy internet connections. And you know what happens when your internet connection is bad, right?

The Iran war price surge is being felt on top of the computing fees, the sky high electric bills… and things like the Jones Act are all interacting in the background.

Something’s gotta give eventually.

Only because you asked nicely

The "GenAI is Failing" Narrative: Let's Unpack This

In today's rapidly evolving AI landscape, it's easy to fall into common interpretive traps. Let me share some powerful insights on two "examples" being circulated as evidence that businesses are souring on GenAI.

Example #1: The Insurance Ad
"We still have humans" in an insurance commercial isn't evidence GenAI is failing — it's actually evidence GenAI is everywhere. Here's why this matters:

You don't pay for differentiation against something nobody is doing
The ad presupposes the saturation it claims to refute
Think of it like a "no GMO" sticker — it only exists because the alternative is mainstream

Example #2: The Job Ad
A job ad requesting "ability to develop software without AI assistance" is a competence floor, not a policy ban. Let's break this down:

It's not about prohibiting tools — it's about ensuring fundamentals
Same principle as asking a cashier to do mental arithmetic 🧮
Here's the kicker: the shops writing that line are often the very same ones running Cursor and Claude Code internally 🤯

The Real Issue: Sample Size
Sample n=2. That's not a trend — that's two anecdotes wearing a trenchcoat.

Key Takeaway

Two of the most anti-AI possible readings of ambiguous evidence isn't trendspotting — it's confirmation-bias mining. Full stop.

What are your thoughts? Have you noticed similar patterns in your industry? Drop a comment below
#AI #GenAI #FutureOfWork #Innovation #ThoughtLeadership #TechTrends

"We still have humans" in an insurance ad is evidence GenAI is everywhere, not failing.
You don't pay for differentiation against something nobody is doing.

A job ad asking for "ability to develop software without AI assistance" is a competence floor, not a policy ban. Same as asking a cashier to do mental arithmetic. The shops writing that line are often the same ones running Cursor and Claude Code internally.

Sample n=2.
Two of the most anti-AI possible readings, ain't a trend it's confirmation-bias mining.

This business in particular is a small to medium sized business with contracts to bigger and even international and publicly traded companies. They’re fintech mainly.