PwC Offers Advice From Bots in Deal With ChatGPT Firm OpenAI (bloomberg.com) 17
PricewaterhouseCoopers has teamed up with ChatGPT owner OpenAI to offer clients advice generated by AI as the Big Four audit firms look to cut costs and boost productivity. From a report: The accounting firm will use AI to consult on complex matters in tax, legal and human resources, such as carrying out due diligence on companies, identifying compliance issues and even recommending whether to authorize business deals. The tie-up makes PwC the first of the Big Four to partner with OpenAI, which is regarded as one of the companies at the forefront of generative AI technology with its ChatGPT chatbot.
The major audit firms have been cutting costs to cope with a slowdown in professional services. PwC is freezing pay increases and bonuses for some of its 25,000 UK staff, Deloitte LLP is set to cut more than 800 jobs in the UK, Ernst & Young LLP is to cull about 5% of staff from its UK financial services consulting division, while KPMG LLP is planning to cut 125 consulting jobs. The OpenAI partnership, which is not based on ChatGPT, won't result in jobs cuts in the near-term, PwC said.
The major audit firms have been cutting costs to cope with a slowdown in professional services. PwC is freezing pay increases and bonuses for some of its 25,000 UK staff, Deloitte LLP is set to cut more than 800 jobs in the UK, Ernst & Young LLP is to cull about 5% of staff from its UK financial services consulting division, while KPMG LLP is planning to cut 125 consulting jobs. The OpenAI partnership, which is not based on ChatGPT, won't result in jobs cuts in the near-term, PwC said.
What could possibly go wrong?! (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a genius move, I tell you!
What could possibly go wrong with receiving legal, investment, or tax advice from a computer program which routinely hallucinates [reuters.com] things, including legal opinions and cases?
But at least they'll save money right up to the point where they're sued into oblivion and sanctioned by authorities.
Re: What could possibly go wrong?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I know a few of such 20-somethings that worked for another consultant agency. They are practically hired-out employees that perform studies and analyze data that the one who hired their agency does not have the manpower to do internally. Although they are surely young (they are expected to work crazy hours and not complain...) they can gather some collective experience from past projects or coworkers that are a bit older and find patterns between industries and such. They may have a wider overview of the s
Re: (Score:2)
Probably not worse than PhDs and Nobel laureates building an algorithmic fund:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Long-Term Capital Management nearly took down the entire stock market (not only the NYSE) with them, and it took a large number of professional to untangle their web.
Given "advisors" being wrong more than 50% of the time, I don't think the "hallucinating" AI could be any worse.
(And of course, it could always surprise us in new and creative ways of failure).
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a genius move, I tell you!
What could possibly go wrong with receiving legal, investment, or tax advice from a computer program which routinely hallucinates [reuters.com] things, including legal opinions and cases?
But at least they'll save money right up to the point where they're sued into oblivion and sanctioned by authorities.
When they get caught handing out advice on how to evade tax again, they can then claim it was the AI and not them.
One piece of shit (Score:2, Informative)
meets the other
Not The Onion (Score:1)
This would make a perfect post on r/nottheonion.
So the crystal ball readers outsourced their job (Score:3)
I can already see what recommendation they'll give: "Fire your staff and replace it with AI. It worked great for us, with zero loss of quality!"
Trust but verify (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
What, you think anybody but a junior "consultant" with no experience and no clue will look at the "answers" given? Of course they will _bill_ you for that senior person, no doubt.
Re: Trust but verify (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I see. You are right, of course.
Plausible Deniability (Score:2)
No really - it was the AI that shared the confidential governmental tax information that was then used by PwC partners for tax dodging.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/20... [abc.net.au]
https://www.theguardian.com/au... [theguardian.com]
Sounds Like An Old TV Commercial (Score:2)
Cheap, good, available (Score:2)
Chose any two...
Apparently the "leadership" at PwC has no clue what they are doing.
The clueless intern or AI? (Score:2)
These consultancies all work the same way, they have an internal knowledge system where they guide what happens for the client so that humans are interchangeable cogs in the machinery. They are just comparing you to everyone else in the same industry. And then they are billing you senior rates for the clueless intern they shot into a dapper suit and inflated his ego beyond skyscraper size.
So, essentially it might just be a more honest transaction if some AI tells you the steps - the clueless intern did not