Despite 96% of C-suite executives expecting AI to boost productivity, employees say it has increased their workload, hampered productivity and caused job burnout, research shows.

The new global study, in partnership with The Upwork Research Institute, interviewed 2,500 global C-suite executives, full-time employees and freelancers. Results show that the optimistic expectations about AI’s impact are not aligning with the reality faced by many employees. The study identifies a disconnect between the high expectations of managers and the actual experiences of employees using AI.

Despite 96% of C-suite executives expecting AI to boost productivity, the study reveals that, 77% of employees using AI say it has added to their workload and created challenges in achieving the expected productivity gains. Not only is AI increasing the workloads of full-time employees, it’s hampering productivity and contributing to employee burnout.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
    33·
    3 months ago

    Your link is just about Google’s energy use, still says it uses a vast amount of energy, and says that A.I. is partially responsible for climate change.

    It even quotes that moron Altman saying that there’s not enough energy to meet their needs and something new needs to be developed.

    I have no idea why you think this supports your point at all.

    • Womble@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      3 months ago

      Artificial intelligence requires a lot of power for much the same reason. The kind of machine learning that produced ChatGPT relies on models that process fantastic amounts of information, and every bit of processing takes energy. When ChatGPT spits out information (or writes someone’s high-school essay), that, too, requires a lot of processing. It’s been estimated that ChatGPT is responding to something like two hundred million requests per day, and, in so doing, is consuming more than half a million kilowatt-hours of electricity. (For comparison’s sake, the average U.S. household consumes twenty-nine kilowatt-hours a day.)

      That was the only bit I was referring to for a source for 0.5GWh energy usage per day for GPT, I agree what Altman says is worthless, or worse deliberately manipulative to keep the VC money flowing into openAI.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
        23·
        3 months ago

        I see, so if we ignore the rest of the article entirely, your point is supported. What an odd way of trying to prove a point.

        Also, I guess this was a lie:

        Ok, you just want to shout not discuss so I wont engage any further.

        Although since it was a lie, I’d love you to tell me what you think I was shouting about.