Gary Marcus

Rank 15 of 47

Score 76

@emollick Ok but even if we accept your two 26% figures, that’s not across the board; coders are probably much more helped than many professions. Eg I am not seeing 26% for truck drivers, shop clerks, or construction workers. It’s not going to be double digits across the population.

9/28/2024, 12:07:38 AM

In reply to:

Ethan Mollick

@emollick

411d

@GaryMarcus Good question! The study I referred to put the gains in individual productivity from steam in the 1800s at 18-22%.

Our controlled randomized field experiment found a 26% improvement in performance for consultants.

This study of coders found a 26% improvement with early Copilot

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

411d

If this claim about productivity is true we should see it reflected in the statistics.

To my knowledge we don’t see anything like an Industrial Revolution level leap in productivity.

Not even close. Is there any data support this, @emollick?

Tsarathustra

@tsarnick

411d

Ethan Mollick says AI is improving productivity to a greater extent than steam power did in the Industrial Revolution and it is secretly being used in businesses and schools because people don't want to get in trouble

The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the impact of AI on productivity across different professions, challenging the generalizability of productivity gains observed in specific studies. The tone is critical but not hostile, aiming to provide a nuanced perspective on the issue.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not cause harm and instead seeks to clarify and question the applicability of the productivity gains across different professions. This aligns with the principle of striving to do no harm with words and actions. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement promotes understanding by questioning the generalizability of the productivity gains, encouraging a more nuanced discussion. This aligns with the principle of using words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion. [+1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in constructive criticism by questioning the applicability of the productivity gains without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. This aligns with the principle of engaging in constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]