Anthropic Finds Businesses Are Mainly Using AI To Automate Work (bloomberg.com) 14
Businesses are overwhelmingly relying on Anthropic's AI software to automate rather than collaborate on work, according to a new report from the OpenAI rival, adding to the risk that AI will upend livelihoods. From a report: More than three quarters (77%) of companies' usage of Anthropic's Claude AI software involved automation patterns, often including "full task delegation," according to a research report the startup released on Monday. The finding was based on an analysis of traffic from Anthropic's application programming interface, which is used by developers and businesses.
[...] On the whole, Anthropic found businesses primarily use Claude for administrative tasks and coding, the latter of which has been a key focus for the company and much of the AI industry. Anthropic, OpenAI and other AI developers have released more sophisticated AI tools that can write and debug code on a user's behalf.
[...] On the whole, Anthropic found businesses primarily use Claude for administrative tasks and coding, the latter of which has been a key focus for the company and much of the AI industry. Anthropic, OpenAI and other AI developers have released more sophisticated AI tools that can write and debug code on a user's behalf.
Duh! AI ain't intelligent you know (Score:1)
A shoddy form filler is about as good as it gets.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been writing LLM agents for about a year now. They can do an insane amount of workloads, as the black-box brain inside of a harness.
The pitfalls, and working around particularly idiosyncrasies of each LLM make for some humorous code paths and comments in your harness, but it is still a thing that is happening right now, this very minute.
Sounds perfect (Score:2)
Should be easy to get rid of those costly CEOs then.
What people do with AI isn't the issue (Score:2, Flamebait)
The issue is: how many people did AI displace?
Re: (Score:2)
And then how many are rehired next year because of dumb assumptions about what AI would achieve.
Re: (Score:2)
The question is simply, can an agentic LLM process do workload X for cheaper than a person? If yes, then the job is gone.
The answer is absolutely yes, right now.
What's up with your shitposts? It's glaringly obvious you have no experience with LLMs in this capacity to speak of.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody is firing people in anticipation of LLMs being able to do a particular job.
We ran them together for a year and evaluated the efficacy.
"ffs, it seems like you don't even know what a variable is."
X+5=6.
How variable is X?
Gosh, who ever would have guessed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well of course they can see it. Just like Microsoft can see what Windows users are doing, and Apple can see what Mac users are doing, and so on.
If a company uses a software vendor of ANY kind, they are entrusting that vendor with it's internal data and workings. It's kind of how software works. This isn't new with AI.
I think people are way too focused on chatbots (Score:2)
I think people are way too focused on chatbots. Automation has displaced workers for decades and that work still continues. There are people who farm fields without tractors, there are factories where humans make products because they can't afford machines. All of those can be automated with old existing technology and they are being automated at steady speed.
With current speed (15 year average) it will take about 150 years before everyone is without a job. Will that speed increase is debatable, but I think
Remember folks even if AI doesn't work (Score:2)
And even if your job isn't one of those somebody else's is and they're not going to go home after they get laid off by automation and eat a bullet they're going to start gunning for your job.
Maybe they'll get it or maybe they won't put your boss knows they're out there and they know cut your pay now
Collaboration, huh (Score:2)