A few observations after a couple weeks with the new set of personal agents (Muse, Instinct, OAI, etc.):
- These agents are going to save us time by knowing a lot about us. Trust is earned, but even without handing over access to my email, it's clear an… more
A few observations after a couple weeks with the new set of personal agents (Muse, Instinct, OAI, etc.):
- These agents are going to save us time by knowing a lot about us. Trust is earned, but even without handing over access to my email, it's clear an agent can simplify booking a restaurant with basic context on my family, what time we eat, our favorite places, etc.
- Our agents will know each of us, but will not know everything about the world; for example, which restaurant has a table. So they will need many connectors to the world.
- The most important 'ux' element for any site that connects with personal agents will be agent management. When thousands of personal agents call the local sushi restaurants as soon as reservations open, who gets the table, how do you manage no-shows, and how do you even know which agent is real?
- There is a whole series of agent management mechanisms that will be developed over the next few weeks/months to solve these problems.
- Many places without these mechanisms are going to get flooded by these agents. They can opt out, but will lose demand. So there will be a healthy market for solutions that successfully use AI to manage AI.like 207insightful 40love 6support 1
This is a version of unbundling, which happens all the time in markets and can be incredibly strategically disruptive… the most valuable components of a product are carved out and performed by a faster/cheaper/better solution. I think Ethan is right to call… more
This is a version of unbundling, which happens all the time in markets and can be incredibly strategically disruptive… the most valuable components of a product are carved out and performed by a faster/cheaper/better solution. I think Ethan is right to call out this trend for certain jobs, which will shine a light on which parts of the job are truly valued (and paid for) by the market… because it’s not always what we think at face value. Are universities paying mathematicians for proofs or teaching?Ethan Mollick
What you are seeing in math right now is a consequence of the jagged frontier, and a precursor of what is to come in other professions. Yes, mathematicians do… more
What you are seeing in math right now is a consequence of the jagged frontier, and a precursor of what is to come in other professions. Yes, mathematicians do math, but they also have other tasks they view as important (mentor students, maintain a scientific community, safeguard the future of a field, foster a love of math) that AI can't do
At least one worry that mathematicians seem to have is that by focusing on the flashiest, most obvious element of what mathematicians do (make proofs), the AI companies are damaging the other tasks that AI can't do. AI can discover superhuman proofs, but that is not all that the math profession is about, and actually can undermine and reduce the attention to the other aspects of the job that are important to mathematicians. It becomes harder to defend the value of the many other tasks mathematicians do to the outside world if the most visible part is taken away.
I suspect we will see more of this across fields and professions that will increasingly be forced to help people understand that their jobs consist not only the most visible tasks that AI can do, but also tasks that the AI cannot do or does badly.like 83love 7insightful 7support 4
AI is helping mathematicians make real progress on Navier-Stokes. A problem that has resisted humans for generations.
Super cool. But that’s not how a billion people are going to decide if AI matters.
They’re going to decide it matters when it gives them… more
AI is helping mathematicians make real progress on Navier-Stokes. A problem that has resisted humans for generations.
Super cool. But that’s not how a billion people are going to decide if AI matters.
They’re going to decide it matters when it gives them time back. When Sunday night isn’t spent doing expense reports. When a five-step approval becomes one step. When a doctor catches a disease earlier. When a kid anywhere in the world gets access to a great teacher. When healthcare gets better and more affordable.
Kevin Scott put it this way:
“A.I. is one of the most powerful things humans have ever invented for improving the quality of life of everyone, but it will take time. It should take time. We've always tackled super-challenging problems through technology. And so, we can either tell ourselves a good story about the future or a bad story about the future, and, whichever one we choose, that's probably the one that'll come true.”
The question is what we choose to do with it.
I think the best companies start with a vision: What is the world we want this technology to help create?
Then work backwards... Build toward that vision AND put the safeguards in place to do it responsibly.
The answer isn’t to start from fear, or to ignore the risks. It’s to be clear about the future we want, and build toward it with safeguards from the start.
This is a time for real leadership. Technical brilliance matters enormously. But so do judgment, experience, empathy, and an understanding of how businesses and institutions actually work, and how change actually lands on people.
The technology isn’t going to decide what kind of future we build with it. We will.like 430love 43insightful 36celebrate 12support 11
