Adoption rate is not derivative of Adoption. Rate of change is. Adoption rate is the percentage of uptake (there, same order with Adoption itself). It being flattening means first derivative is getting close to 0.

▲

ajkjk 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I agree, I think I misunderstood their wording.

In which case it's at least funny, but maybe subtract one from all my derivatives.. Which kills my point also. Dang.

▲

brianshaler 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It maps pretty cleanly to the well understood derivatives of a position vector. Position (user count), velocity (first derivative, change in user count over time), acceleration (second derivative, speeding up or flattening of the velocity), and jerk (third derivative, change in acceleration such as the shift between from acceleration to deceleration)

It really is a beautiful title.

▲

alwa 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It is a beautiful title and a beautiful way to think about it—alas, I think gp is right: here, from the charts anyway, the writer seems to mean the count of firms reporting adoption (as a proportion of total survey respondents).

Which paints a grimmer picture—I was surprised that they report a marked decline in adoption amongst firms of 250+ employees. That rate-as-first-derivative apparently turned negative months ago!

Then again, it’s awfully scant on context: does the absolute number of firms tell us much about how (or how productively) they’re using this tech? Maybe that’s for their deluxe investors.

▲

postexitus 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It is not velocity, it is not change. Have you read the graphs? What do you think 12% in Aug and Sep for 250+ Employee companies mean, that another 12% of companies adopted AI or is it a flat "12% of the companies have adopted in Aug, and it did not change in Sep"

	▲	3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	brianshaler 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> Have you read the graphs? Yes. The title specifically is beautiful. The charts aren't nearly as interesting, though probably a bit more than a meta discussion on whether certain time intervals align with one interpretation of the author's intent or another.

▲

amelius 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The function log(x) also has derivative that goes closer and closer to 0.

However lim x->inf log(x) is still inf.

	▲	lkey 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Is it your assertion that an 'infinite' percentage! of the businesses will use AI on a long enough time scale? If you need everything to be math, at least have the courtesy to use the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function and not unbounded logarithmic curves when referring to on our very finite world.