The rapid spread of artificial intelligence has people wondering: who’s most likely to embrace AI in their daily lives? Many assume it’s the tech-savvy – those who understand how AI works – who are most eager to adopt it.
Surprisingly, our new research (published in the Journal of Marketing) finds the opposite. People with less knowledge about AI are actually more open to using the technology. We call this difference in adoption propensity the “lower literacy-higher receptivity” link.
I very much agree with your conclusions and general approach.
LLMs are great for certain tasks that are programming related and it does it very well. I, too, often find myself needing scripts that as long as they did what they were suppose to, I really didn’t care how.
Another thing I’ve noticed(which is probably related to amounts of training data) is that it can help better with simple Python tasks as opposed to how it handles simple rust tasks.
But you mentioned one of my main issues with. Ice been programming for 15 years or so, and still learning. All the available llms did crucial errors about fundamental tabd complex topics and got the answer so very wrong but also sounding very convincing. Couple it with lack of proper linking to the sources of the response, you might see why having it explain code might cause your learn wrongly. Although it is also possible to say this about randoms internet tutorials. I always try to remind myself that it’s a tool that produces output that always needs to be verified.
I often make in a new chat with a prompt including assumptions based on the info from output of previous chat. Most of the time, it then makes a good job factchecking itself and for example tells many things not matching with what it told in previous chats. Then you know that it has not enough training data in that regard and failed to get relevant infos from it’s web search.
More than once above happened to me on copilot (from enterprise ms365) and then chatGPT limited free promts saved me 😂