Negativity bias imo. We all hear about the failures associated or attributed to AI. I say attributed as I'm curious how many whether LLM generated output or not get prescribed away from being any one individual or team's fault.
Of course we see larp success stories, marketing fluff promising the sky, but genuine realistic success stories in devops relating to AI are rarely exciting to read or write.
The real paradox here is that reasonable people continue to drink the AI marketing kool-aid/hype.
AI is fundamentally built around probability.
When relying on probability, it should be expected that an element of randomness will be instilled into your operation.
The only real certainity is that if you continue to roll the dice, you will eventually lose. Probability (aka AI) makes it so. Failure to grasp this points to an educational failure imo.
2 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 15.2 ms ] threadOf course we see larp success stories, marketing fluff promising the sky, but genuine realistic success stories in devops relating to AI are rarely exciting to read or write.
The real paradox here is that reasonable people continue to drink the AI marketing kool-aid/hype.
AI is fundamentally built around probability.
When relying on probability, it should be expected that an element of randomness will be instilled into your operation.
The only real certainity is that if you continue to roll the dice, you will eventually lose. Probability (aka AI) makes it so. Failure to grasp this points to an educational failure imo.