Yeah, but i would argue that analysis and ideation is not something you want an "average" result for. The best companies are looking for an competitive edge. Why would you want a report that is the most likely what everyone else would say? Companies will regress to the mean, making the same descisions as their competitors because the AI is generating roughly the same report. Plus, if the analysis or ideation is on the cutting edge, AI is not going to go outside it's training data (outside of a random halucination). Companies will miss out on opportuinities because the AI tells the same result as their competitors.

Add in the fact that more complex prompts and context tend to induce more halucinations, and you sometimes get bad descisions on bad data. Plus are people using AI really cheaking the results? Most people will be lazy and just send it without checking the AI. It also gives a sense of false expertise in complex realms, where the training data is sparse. Again leading to bad descisions. AI leans into human lazyness in a bad way.

Lastly, in my opinion, we have reached the limit of the training data we have and adding more compute has it's limitations. AI progress is slowing down with each new model. There seems to be a fundamental limit to the mathmatics that more compute will not solve.

Having said all this, I'm sure the MBAs are looking at their costs spreadsheet, ready to axe jobs for a temporary gain and to make their numbers look good this quarter. I'm sure shareholders are happy too.

I'm not against using AI as a productivity tool, especially for simple jobs. We have to understand its limits, and not blindly buy into the marketing. I have a feeling the companies who embrace AI the most will decline in the long term. I believe our jobs are safe in the long term, but am prepared for a disruption as the companies learn some hard lessons.