Readit NewsAnything coming from Ayush and Ramesh should be highly scrutinized. Ramesh should stick to studying Camera Culture in the Media Lab.
I will believe a study from MIT when it comes out of CSAIL.
This is confusing.. it's directly saying AI is improving employee productivity, but that's not leading to more business profit... how does that happen?
There's a reason it has a catchy headline, there's a reason you needed to fill in an email form to get access to the study, and there's a reason why the 2nd author has an agentic AI startup.
I thought it was a low quality article with no data or in detail methods. MIT needs to do better. This is the second article of this type in the last few months that caught headlines.
Controlling the physical space around Congress, the Supreme Court, the federal bureaucracy means that every legislator, judge, and federal worker sees the Guard on their commute.
The message is environmental and atmospheric. Propaganda for the governing class. Power made visible to those for whom there is intent to intimidate.
Extending that, DC notoriously exists as an anomaly violating the foundation that the US was founded on. It is a city that isn't a city, a population with little representation in the federal apparatus that controls it.
DC's legal vulnerability makes it perfect for testing. What works there can be threatened elsewhere. "We did it in Washington" becomes the precedent.
The 30-day limit isn't a constraint. It's a demonstration period.
Oh - I get it. It's the world where this publication wants clicks for ad revenue.
"Sure, electric vehicles are becoming more and more widely adopted, but wouldn't it be better for this article if they weren't?"
Not everything is a conspiracy.
There are few markets which have supported 3-5% brokerage fees (even i-banking is <100bps at scale now) so I'm curious where the fees will settle.
People forget how tiny the VC business is: just a pimple on the PE market. Typically it’s a tiny part of a big investor’s portfolio, just to have some exposure diversity. You can tell how important it is to them when you attend an LP meeting for a VC fund: the GPs may be bowing and scraping* but among the LPs’ representatives are a lot of 22 year old first year associates, which shows how unimportant the sector is to these big guys.
* props to the GPs who are both not arrogant and not ingratiating to their customers (cough sorry, “LPs”). In my experience there are fewer than you would think.
Ironically, Calpers' excuse for their poor returns is that the "top tier" VCs (such as Sequoia) now exclude them due to their public reporting requirements, and therefore they are forced to deploy to tier 2 managers.
IMO, it's clear there is massive demand for any research that shows large positive or negative impacts of AI on the economy. The recent WSJ article about Aiden Toner-Rodgers is another great example of demand for AI impact outstripping the supply of AI impact. Obviously this thread's example is just shoddy research vs. the outright data fraud of Toner-Rodgers, but it's hard to not see the pattern.
I hope that MIT and other research institutions can figure this out...