Interesting! I really like the printing press analogy. One issue is that, as I read recently, Gutenberg went bankrupt because there was no market for 100 copies of the same book. Ahead of his time.
These things take a long time to shake out, hopefully not too painfully in this case.
Here's a different view of the future: As AI takes over jobs that require economics training, students flee the discipline and universities gut economics departments. The pipeline of trained economists dries up. The same thing happens in finance, accounting, and related disciplines. The budget savings are applauded by the public, National Treasury, and the ruling DA/MK. By 2040, the most popular majors at Stellenbosch are theology, auto repair, nursing, landscaping, and animal husbandry. The school's distinguhished tradition of economic research is carried on by AI (supervised by the sociology department), but few faculty members have enough economics training to understand the results.
Your enthusiasm for outsourcing human brains to the machine alarms me, Johan. I have some questions.
As an editor I would ask: in what way was that paper 'improved'? In style?
From what I’ve seen so far of papers 'improved' by the use of AI, I see a bland style concocted from thousands of academic papers on the internet. The author’s own style, painstakingly acquired over years of practice, has vanished.
And what is 'productive', Johan, about academics churning out more and more papers? Who will have time to read them? How will anyone be able to sort out the few that are worthwhile from the mass of rubbish?
That has been a problem in academia for a long time, even before the machines got in on the act. Perhaps what we need is fewer papers? More thinking and less writing?
I see papers where there is no sense that the author read all the papers and books cited in the paper and weighed up what was best. It's as if all those works had the same value, or lack of value. And this will get worse with people using the machine to churn out even more. Will authors ask the machine to read them and judge which are good? But it can't do that, as judgement is a human quality.
Weer eens, Johan, jy is baie akademici vêr vooruit. Ek wil jou nogmaals oor jou KI-insigte komplimenteer. Ek kan regtig nie met jou argumente fout vind nie. KI is ongetwyfeld 'n rewolusionêre ontwikkeling wat selfs groter impak op ons menslike/ekonomiese vooruitgang gaan hê as die lanbou-, industriële- en digitale rewolusies gesamentlik. En die verblindende spoed waarteen die rewolusie ontvou, waarna jy ook verwys het, gaan in die geskiedenis-anale as totaal ongeëewenaard aangeteken word. Jou statistiese analise in die grafies voorstelling bewys dit reeds onteenseglik. Ek dink diegene wat in ontkenning is oor KI en/of uit vrees vir die onbekende wil briek aandraai, gaan agter raak. Daar is geen twyfel dat daar gevare ook is, maar die vorige sosiaal-ekonomiese rewolusies, het ook met groot onsekerhede en onvoorspelbaarhede gepaard gegaan. Maar nogtens het die mensdom, uit 'n ontwikkelingsoogpunt gesien, nog elke keer daarin kon slaag om die voorspellings van die doemprofete te troef en 'n wêreld te kon skep wat talle male meer welvarend geword het as voor die rewolusies. Ons sal dit weer kan doen. Pyn gaan hierdie keer ook ervaar word tydens die oorgang, maar die opbrengste wat gaan voortspruit uit hierdie rewolusie, gaan weer eens die skeptici se donkerste verwagtinge ongedaan maak...
Jy is meer hoopvol as ek.
Interesting! I really like the printing press analogy. One issue is that, as I read recently, Gutenberg went bankrupt because there was no market for 100 copies of the same book. Ahead of his time.
These things take a long time to shake out, hopefully not too painfully in this case.
Here's a different view of the future: As AI takes over jobs that require economics training, students flee the discipline and universities gut economics departments. The pipeline of trained economists dries up. The same thing happens in finance, accounting, and related disciplines. The budget savings are applauded by the public, National Treasury, and the ruling DA/MK. By 2040, the most popular majors at Stellenbosch are theology, auto repair, nursing, landscaping, and animal husbandry. The school's distinguhished tradition of economic research is carried on by AI (supervised by the sociology department), but few faculty members have enough economics training to understand the results.
It's a possibility! But I'd give it a low probability.
Your enthusiasm for outsourcing human brains to the machine alarms me, Johan. I have some questions.
As an editor I would ask: in what way was that paper 'improved'? In style?
From what I’ve seen so far of papers 'improved' by the use of AI, I see a bland style concocted from thousands of academic papers on the internet. The author’s own style, painstakingly acquired over years of practice, has vanished.
And what is 'productive', Johan, about academics churning out more and more papers? Who will have time to read them? How will anyone be able to sort out the few that are worthwhile from the mass of rubbish?
That has been a problem in academia for a long time, even before the machines got in on the act. Perhaps what we need is fewer papers? More thinking and less writing?
I see papers where there is no sense that the author read all the papers and books cited in the paper and weighed up what was best. It's as if all those works had the same value, or lack of value. And this will get worse with people using the machine to churn out even more. Will authors ask the machine to read them and judge which are good? But it can't do that, as judgement is a human quality.
Weer eens, Johan, jy is baie akademici vêr vooruit. Ek wil jou nogmaals oor jou KI-insigte komplimenteer. Ek kan regtig nie met jou argumente fout vind nie. KI is ongetwyfeld 'n rewolusionêre ontwikkeling wat selfs groter impak op ons menslike/ekonomiese vooruitgang gaan hê as die lanbou-, industriële- en digitale rewolusies gesamentlik. En die verblindende spoed waarteen die rewolusie ontvou, waarna jy ook verwys het, gaan in die geskiedenis-anale as totaal ongeëewenaard aangeteken word. Jou statistiese analise in die grafies voorstelling bewys dit reeds onteenseglik. Ek dink diegene wat in ontkenning is oor KI en/of uit vrees vir die onbekende wil briek aandraai, gaan agter raak. Daar is geen twyfel dat daar gevare ook is, maar die vorige sosiaal-ekonomiese rewolusies, het ook met groot onsekerhede en onvoorspelbaarhede gepaard gegaan. Maar nogtens het die mensdom, uit 'n ontwikkelingsoogpunt gesien, nog elke keer daarin kon slaag om die voorspellings van die doemprofete te troef en 'n wêreld te kon skep wat talle male meer welvarend geword het as voor die rewolusies. Ons sal dit weer kan doen. Pyn gaan hierdie keer ook ervaar word tydens die oorgang, maar die opbrengste wat gaan voortspruit uit hierdie rewolusie, gaan weer eens die skeptici se donkerste verwagtinge ongedaan maak...