I'm not always precise with my language, but business tasks can be pretty broad, I think "arbitrary new tasks" is not an unreasonable rephrasing on my part?

Consider I was replying to this:

> So are we all going to be out of a job?

While your boss now has the capacity to ask Claude to train a new AI model to auto-balance a tower defence game's mob, cost, and tower parameters (I know because I've done it), this only matters if you and your boss are working in a video games company.

If you and your boss are actually florists, you care if your boss can get Claude to automate a rose pruning, dead-heading, and fertilising robot.

People are trying, but I don't think they'd be happy with 91.5% success rate: https://www.emerald.com/ir/article-abstract/doi/10.1108/IR-0...

▲

FabCH 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Don't get me wrong, we are all guilty of this.

It's just amazing how quickly we accept that models are good at something.

My florist boss can't get Claude to automate rose pruning. But she sure as hell doesn't need to wait until Jacques is back in the shop to respond to that French supplier anymore. There is a lot of "business tasks" that are just paper being shuffled around no matter if you are a florist, baker, workshop owner, custom CNC shop, student offering lessons in extra time or whatever. And LLMs are already scary good at those.

	▲	ben_w 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> There is a lot of "business tasks" that are just paper being shuffled around no matter if you are a florist, baker, workshop owner, custom CNC shop, student offering lessons in extra time or whatever. And LLMs are already scary good at those. Yes indeed, but I was responding to "So are we all going to be out of a job?", not "Will AI radically change the jobs market?" We got the thing I thought would make everyone unemployed (AI which can make AI), but it turned out the AI good enough to make AI, happened before we figured out the general problem of few-shot learning that would mean the AI made by AI puts us all out of jobs.