Täällä seurataan AI-ripuligeneraattoreiden maailmanvalloitusta

[pigra senlaborulo]

mikrobitti.fi
Suomalaisnuorista jopa 40 prosenttia hyödyntää opinnoissaan tekoälyä
Anna Helakallio
~2 minutes

Jopa 40 prosenttia suomalaisnuorista on hyödyntänyt tekoälyä opinnoissaan tai vapaa-ajallaan, selviää OP:n ja Taloustutkimuksen toteuttamasta kyselystä.

Kyselyyn vastasi 3 533 yli 16-vuotiasta suomalaista. Kyselyn vastausten virhemarginaali on +/- 1,65 prosenttiyksikköä.

Tuloksista selvisi, että nuoret ovat innokkaampia hyödyntämään tekoälyä kuin vanhemmat suomalaiset. Alle puolet 16–25-vuotiaista vastanneista ovat hyödyntäneet tekoälyä opinnoissaan. Neljännes 26–34 -vuotiaista kertoo käyttävänsä tekoälyä työelämässään.

Nuoret ovat myös vähemmän kriittisiä tekoälystä kuin vanhemmat. Vain 30 prosenttia 26–34 -vuotiaista ei halua lainkaan käyttää tekoälyä, kun taas vastaava luku 50–64-vuotiaiden keskuudessa on jopa 50 prosenttia.

”Nuoremmilla on usein matalampi kynnys tutustua uusiin teknologioihin, ja ottaa niitä aktiiviseen käyttöön”, OP Ryhmän teknologia- ja kehitysjohtaja Kasimir Hirn selittää konsernin tiedotteessa.

Moni vastanneista pelkää tekoälyn vaikutuksia. 25 prosenttia kaikista vastanneista kertoo, että he ovat vähintään hieman huolissaan tekoälyn korvaavan heidän työtehtävänsä. Nuoret ovat enemmän huolissaan tekoälystä kuin vanhemmat vastaajat.

Pelko saattaa olla perätön. Hirnin mukaan tekoälystä ennemmin tulee ajan myötä tukiäly, joka ”joka avustaa luovassa työssä [...] ja ratkaisujen tekemisessä.”

”Työntekijöiden osaamisen päivittäminen ja ylläpitäminen on keskeistä, kun tekoäly arkipäiväistyy osaksi työelämän rutiininomaisia työtehtäviä”, Hirn kertoo.

https://www.mikrobitti.fi/uutiset/mb/7b ... 26c5125695

[pigra senlaborulo]

kotaku.com
Video Game Actors Go On Strike For AI Protections
Ethan Gach
5–6 minutes

Video game actors are going on strike for the first time since 2017 after months of negotiations with Activision, Epic Games, and other big publishers and studios over higher pay, better safety measures, and protections from new generative AI technologies. They’ll be hitting the picket line a year after Hollywood actors and writers wrapped up their own historic strikes in an escalation that could have big consequences for the development and marketing of some of the industry’s biggest games.

Members of the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) voted last fall to authorize a strike citing an unwillingness of big game companies to budge on guaranteeing performers rights over how their work is used in training AI or creating AI-generated copies. Roughly 2,600 voice actors and motion capture artists, including talents like Troy Baker from The Last of Us, Jennifer Hale from Mass Effect, and Matt Mercer from The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom, have been working without an Interactive Media Agreement since November 2022. The strike starts on July 26 at 12:01 a.m.

“The video game industry generates billions of dollars in profit annually. The driving force behind that success is the creative people who design and create those games,” chief negotiator Duncan Crabtree-Ireland said in a statement. “That includes the SAG-AFTRA members who bring memorable and beloved game characters to life, and they deserve and demand the same fundamental protections as performers in film, television, streaming, and music: fair compensation and the right of informed consent for the A.I. use of their faces, voices, and bodies. Frankly, it’s stunning that these video game studios haven’t learned anything from the lessons of last year - that our members can and will stand up and demand fair and equitable treatment with respect to A.I., and the public supports us in that.”

“We are disappointed the union has chosen to walk away when we are so close to a deal, and we remain prepared to resume negotiations, spokesperson Audrey Cooling for the companies involved in the Interactive Media Agreement said in an emailed statement. “We have already found common ground on 24 out of 25 proposals, including historic wage increases and additional safety provisions. Our offer is directly responsive to SAG-AFTRA’s concerns and extends meaningful AI protections that include requiring consent and fair compensation to all performers working under the IMA. These terms are among the strongest in the entertainment industry.”

While games set to come out this fall like Dragon Age: The Veilguard, who’s recently revealed voice cast includes several guild members, likely already have their voice and motion-capture work completed, the strike means SAG-AFTRA members would be unavailable for projects that are years out, and wouldn’t be around to record for any potential last-minute re-writes for things that are closer to coming out. Games relied much less on actor performances in the past, but most popular franchises are now fully voice-acted, with the biggest-budget productions using motion capture to transfer actors’ real-life performances, frame by frame, into the game.

The last time video game actors went on strike in 2016, it was primarily over pay rates and lasted a entire year. It’s unclear if the strike this time around will be over any sooner. Unlike with the issue of higher pay, people involved in the current negotiations say that the lack of AI protections poses an existential threat to actors and their creative output. Just this week, Wired reported that companies like Activision Blizzard and Riot Games were moving ahead with using generative AI tools to help create concept art and even potentially assets that would make it into finished games like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3.

“Eighteen months of negotiations have shown us that our employers are not interested in fair, reasonable A.I. protections, but rather flagrant exploitation,” said negotiating committee chair Sarah Elmaleh said in a statement. “We refuse this paradigm—we will not leave any of our members behind, nor will we wait for sufficient protection any longer. We look forward to collaborating with teams on our Interim and Independent contracts, which provide A.I. transparency, consent and compensation to all performers, and to continuing to negotiate in good faith with this bargaining group when they are ready to join us in the world we all deserve.”

SAG-AFTRA video game voice actors are set to hold a panel featuring Ashly Burch (Horizon Forbidden West), Noshir Dala (Red Dead Redemption II), and others at San Diego Comicon later this week on July 26.

https://kotaku.com/voice-actor-strike-s ... 1851604153

[Spandau Mullet]

https://www.upwork.com/research/ai-enhanced-work-models

From Burnout to Balance: AI-Enhanced Work Models

Executive summary

• Research by The Upwork Research Institute reveals that 71% of full-time employees are burned out and 65% report struggling with employer demands on their productivity. Meanwhile, 81% of global C-suite leaders acknowledge they have increased demands on workers in the past year.¹
• Leaders have high hopes that generative AI will help boost productivity, as 96% of C-suite leaders say they expect the use of AI tools to increase their company’s overall productivity levels. Already, 39% of companies in our study are mandating the use of AI tools, with an additional 46% encouraging their use.
• However, this new technology has not yet fully delivered on this productivity promise: Nearly half (47%) of employees using AI say they have no idea how to achieve the productivity gains their employers expect, and 77% say these tools have actually decreased their productivity and added to their workload.
• By introducing new technology into outdated models and systems, organizations are failing to unlock the full productivity value of generative AI across their workforce. Business leaders need to shift how they organize talent and work by balancing traditional and nontraditional approaches. This includes leveraging alternative talent pools, co-creating measures of productivity with their people, and becoming fluent in the language of skills rather than job descriptions.

Juuh hyvällä polulla ollaan

[Spandau Mullet]

Vaihtuisi työpaikka kyllä todella äkkiä jos tulis joku "mandating the use of AI tools", ainakin jos kyse olisi ripuligeneraattoreista.

[pigra senlaborulo]

mikrobitti.fi
Räiskintäpelin pelaajille myytiin tekoälysisältöä – mikä näistä se on, vai kenties kaikki?
Petri Ranta
~2 minutes

Sisäpiirin paljastusten mukaan Activisionin Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 -pelissä on sisältöä, joka on todellisuudessa luotu tekoälyllä. Studio itse ei ole koskaan maininnut asiasta mitään julkisuudessa.

Peliin liittyvästä tekoälysisällöstä uutisoi ensimmäisenä aikakauslehti Wired. Sen mukaan tekoälysisältö sisältyy Yokai’s Wrath -pakettiin, joka julkaistiin joulukuussa 2023 ja jonka voi ostaa 15 dollarilla.

Wired haastatteli juttuaan varten kahta Activisionin työntekijää. He eivät halunneet paljastaa henkilöllisyyksiään mahdollisten vastatoimenpiteiden pelossa ja esiintyvät Wiredin jutussa nimillä Noah ja Violet.

Noah nostaa esille sen, että Activisionilta irtisanottiin suuri joukko 2d-taiteilijoita vuoden 2023 puolella. Jäljelle jääneet taiteilijat puolestaan ovat joutuneet studiossa tekoälykoulutukseen.

Tekoälyn hyödyntämisestä huolimatta Noah kertoo, että Activision ulkoistaa aina vain enemmän taiteellisen sisällön luontia yhtiön ulkopuolelle. Studioon jääneillä työntekijöillä on myös vaikeuksia pysyä johdon asettamissa aikatauluissa.

Violet puolestaan myöntää Wiredille, että tekoälyllekin on käyttötarkoituksensa, mutta ei voittojen maksimoinnin työkaluna.

Paljastuksissa ei ole mainittu, mikä Yokai’s Wrathin esine tai asia on tekoälyn luoma.

”Todennäköisesti et ikinä huomaa missä kohdin tekoälyä on käytetty ja mihin, mutta tiedät, että [tekoälysisältö] on siellä”, Violet luonnehtii Wiredin jutussa.

PC Gamerin Harvey Randall epäilee, että kyse voi olla pakettiin sisältyvästä japanilaista pirunaamaria esittävästä latausruudusta, sillä itse pelissä naamari näyttää aivan erilaiselta. Samaan hengenvetoon hän tosin myöntää, että kyse voi olla vain tekoälysisällöstä tietämisen aiheuttamasta vahvistusvinoumasta.

IGN menee arviossaan vielä pidemmälle ja nostaa esille mahdollisuuden, että kaikki Yokai’s Wrath -paketin sisältö voi olla todellisuudessa tehty tekoälyllä.

https://www.mikrobitti.fi/uutiset/mb/cc ... 079afbc73b

[Spandau Mullet]

Olipas kunnon Mikrobitti-tasoinen uutisointi taas. Tuon saitin voisi ainakin korvata ai-ripulilla eikä kukaan huomaisi eroa. Tai ehkä näin on jo tehtykin tai ehkä ei, ei voi tietää, katso kuvat!

[hellästi takaluukkuun pantu koira]

AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data

We find that indiscriminate use of model-generated content in training causes irreversible defects in the resulting models, in which tails of the original content distribution disappear.

sisältöimurointi käyttäjiltä jatkunee siis

[Spandau Mullet]

Dokkari AI-höpön koulutukseen käytettävästä orjatyövoimasta. En ainakaan muista nähneeni topsossa aiemmin.

[Spandau Mullet]

https://futurism.com/investors-concerne ... king-money

Investors Are Suddenly Getting Very Concerned That AI Isn't Making Any Serious Money

"We sense that Wall Street is growing increasingly skeptical."

An increasing number of Silicon Valley investors and Wall Street analysts are starting to ring the alarm bells over the countless billions of dollars being invested in AI, an overconfidence they warn could result in a massive bubble.

As the Washington Post reports, investment bankers are singing a dramatically different tune than last year, a period marked by tremendous hype surrounding AI, and are instead starting to become wary of Big Tech's ability to actually turn the tech into a profitable business.

"Despite its expensive price tag, the technology is nowhere near where it needs to be in order to be useful," Goldman Sach's most senior stock analyst Jim Covello wrote in a report last month. "Overbuilding things the world doesn’t have use for, or is not ready for, typically ends badly."

Earlier this week, Google released its second-quarter earnings, failing to impress investors with razor-thin profit margins and surging costs related to training AI models. Capital expenditures are surging far past what the company had been spending previously, as the Wall Street Journal reports, with this year's total spend expected to surpass $49 billion, or 84 percent higher than what the company averaged over the last five years.

However, Google CEO Sundar Pichai is holding onto his guns, arguing that the "risk of underinvesting is dramatically greater than the risk of overinvesting for us here."

"Not investing to be at the front here has much more significant downsides," Pichai told investors on Tuesday.

Sure, the tech giant has a lot of cash to burn — but seeing any returns on those $49 billion will likely prove far more difficult. With the AI market clogged with products that are still mostly free, the tech costs a lot to run but isn't bringing in much cash.

As such, Google is facing similar challenges to Microsoft and Meta, which are committing vast swathes of their available resources to AI without a clear monetization plan.

According to Barclays analysts, investors are expected to pour $60 billion a year into developing AI models, enough to develop 12,000 products roughly the size of OpenAI's ChatGPT.

But whether the world needs 12,000 ChatGPT chatbots remains dubious at best.

"We do expect lots of new services... but probably not 12,000 of them," Barclays analysts wrote in a note, as quoted by the WaPo. "We sense that Wall Street is growing increasingly skeptical."

For quite some time now, experts have voiced concerns over a growing AI bubble, comparing it to the dot-com crisis of the late 1990s.

"Capital continues to pour into the AI sector with very little attention being paid to company fundamentals," tech stock analyst Richard Windsor wrote in a March research note, "in a sure sign that when the music stops there will not be many chairs available."

"This is precisely what happened with the Internet in 1999, autonomous driving in 2017, and now generative AI in 2024," he added.

In a blog post last month, Sequoia Capital partner David Cahn argued that the entire tech industry would have to generate $600 billion a year to remain viable.

While "speculative frenzies are part of technology, and so they are not something to be afraid of," he argued, AI tech is anything but a "get rich quick" scheme.

That doesn't mean he's entirely pessimistic, though.

"In reality, the road ahead is going to be a long one," Cahn wrote. "It will have ups and downs. But almost certainly it will be worthwhile."

But whether AI chatbots like ChatGPT will ever turn into cash-printing machines to recoup these enormous investments remains to be seen. As of right now, the cost of training these AI models and keeping them running is massively outpacing revenue.

How much time does the tech industry have to stop bleeding cash as it pours money into the tech?

If recent reports are to be believed, OpenAI may lose $5 billion this year and run out of cash in the next 12 months, barring further cash injections — an early warning sign that smaller companies already struggling to compete with Big Tech may be snuffed out before too long.

puhkea ripulikupla, puhkea

[pigra senlaborulo]

theregister.com
Zuck dreams of personalized AI assistants for all – just like email
Tobias Mann
4–5 minutes

SIGGRAPH Big public AI models like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Copilot have become near ubiquitous over the past few years – but Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is banking that before long, everyone will have at least one, if not more, personalized AI assistants to call their own.

Onstage at SIGGRAPH in Denver, Colorado, on Monday, Zuckerberg and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang discussed the Meta boss's vision: A world in which custom AI agents – trained to mimic your personality or brand – might help someone prepare for a difficult conversation, or interact with customers on their behalf long after they've signed off for the day.

"A lot of our vision is that we want to empower all the people who use our products to basically create agents for themselves," he gushed.

"Whether that's all the many, many millions of creators that are on the platform, or the hundreds of millions of small businesses, we eventually want to just be able to pull in all your content, very quickly stand up a business agent, and be able to interact with your customers and do sales and customer support."

You can replay their chat below.

This vision is at the heart of Meta's AI Studio offering. It aims to make it easier for users to take its pre-trained Llama models and, as Zuckerberg puts it, "make it so every creator can build sort of an AI version of themselves." This agent or assistant could then be put to work interacting with your followers in a tone and style that mimics your own.

For online communities with such high moral standards as Facebook or Instagram, we can't imagine how that possibly could go wrong.

Nonetheless, Zuckerberg expects these agents to take all different shapes and sizes, and be used for everything from automating monotonous tasks to entertainment and meme generators.

Ever a believer in augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR), Zuckerberg also suggested that customers might talk to their AI self using AR glasses – like the ones Meta developed in collaboration with Ray-Ban. Just imagine getting a pep talk from your smart glasses.

However, for customers and enterprises that would rather not give Meta or its various properties access to any more of their data than they already have, Zuckerberg also echoed his commitment to open AI development.

At the heart of all of these efforts is Meta's Llama family of open large language models – the latest and largest version of which launched last week, boasting anywhere from 8 billion to 405 billion parameters, a 128,000-token context window, and support for eight languages.

"I thought Llama 2 was probably the biggest event in AI last year … because when that came out, it activated every company, every enterprise, and every industry" to embrace AI, Huang remarked of the decision to open source the models.

Unfortunately for investors hoping Meta and others' AI infrastructure investments will pay off sooner rather than later, Zuckerberg reiterated that this work won't happen overnight.

"Even if the progress on the foundation models stopped now, which I don't think it will, I think we'd have five years of product innovation for the industry to figure out how to most effectively use all the stuff that's gotten built so far," he explained.

Whether or not a clearer picture of Meta's AI strategy will assuage investors' anxiety will become clearer after the biz reports its Q2 earnings on Wednesday. But, as you may recall, setting realistic expectations didn't exactly go over that well with investors the last time.

And it's not like shareholders don't have reason to be worried. As Huang was keen to point out toward the end of their chat, Zuckerberg's business has been one of Nvidia's best customers. Meta is on track to deploy some 600,000 of Nvidia's GPUs, which you may recall can cost anywhere from $30,000 to $40,000 apiece. Investors will want to know exactly what that is buying them.

https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/30/ ... rsonal_ai/

[Spandau Mullet]

https://noyb.eu/en/chatgpt-provides-fal ... correct-it

ChatGPT provides false information about people, and OpenAI can’t correct it

In the EU, the GDPR requires that information about individuals is accurate and that they have full access to the information stored, as well as information about the source. Surprisingly, however, OpenAI openly admits that it is unable to correct incorrect information on ChatGPT. Furthermore, the company cannot say where the data comes from or what data ChatGPT stores about individual people. The company is well aware of this problem, but doesn’t seem to care. Instead, OpenAI simply argues that “factual accuracy in large language models remains an area of active research”. Therefore, noyb today filed a complaint against OpenAI with the Austrian DPA.

Lisää linkin takaa. Ei ole ensimmäinen tämmöinen keissi ja antaa tulla lisää vaan

[pigra senlaborulo]

mikrobitti.fi
Microsoft kouluttaa tekoälyä myös tiedeartikkeleilla – niiden kirjoittajat eivät tienneet asiasta mitään
Anna Helakallio
~2 minutes

Tiedejulkaisijayhtiö Taylor & Francisin omistama Informa on antanut Microsoftille oikeuden käyttää tiedejulkaisujen artikkeleita tekoälyn koulutukseen. Informa ei kuitenkaan kysynyt artikkeleiden kirjoittajilta lupaa tähän.

Asiasta uutisoi muun muassa The Conversation ja The Bookseller.

Tämä lupa on osa yhtiöiden suurempaa tekoäly-yhteistyösopimusta. Toukokuussa solmittu sopimus sisältää automatisoidun viittaamisen järjestelmän kehittämisen ja Informan aiempien tekoälyjärjestelmien parantamiseen.

Microsoft maksaa Informalle ensin yli 9 miljoonaa euroa datasta, minkä jälkeen yhtiö maksaa sille kolme vuoden ajan lisämaksuja. Lisämaksujen summaa ei ole määritelty.

Sopimuksesta ei tiedotettu Informan omistamien julkaisujen kirjoittajille. Asia tuli laajempaan tietoisuuteen vasta viime viikolla, kun tutkija Ruth Clemens twiittasi aiheesta ja The Bookseller -lehti teki twiitin perusteella uutisen. Taylor & Francis kertoi silloin lehdelle, että yhtiö ”pyrkii suojelemaan kirjoittajien työn koskemattomuutta.”

Yhdistyneen kuningaskunnan kirjailijoiden ammattiliitto Society of Authors julkaisi tämän jälkeen tiedotteen aiheesta. Liitto kertoo, että sopimus nostaa esiin hyvin monta tekijänoikeudellista ja eettistä ongelmaa.

”Olemme hyvin huolissamme siitä, että kustantajat tekevät sopimuksia teknologiayritysten kanssa kuulematta tekijöitään”, liitto kertoo tiedotteessaan.

Kaikki kirjoittajat eivät voi perua suostumustaan artikkeleidensa käyttöön. Tutkimuslehtien tekemät sopimukset voivat mahdollistaa artikkeleiden käytön lähestulkoon mihin tahansa.

Kirjoittajien oikeudet tutkimuslehdissä ovat olleet pitkään kiistanalainen aihe. Tutkijat tai yliopistot joutuvat usein maksamaan tiedejulkaisuille oman tutkimuksensa julkaisemisesta, eikä heillä ole aina täyttä tekijänoikeutta tutkimusartikkeleihinsa.


https://www.mikrobitti.fi/uutiset/mb/23 ... 42805e2354

[Jimi Ketipinor]

tämmöne hyvä nauruhuumorivitsikommentääriviteo

[pigra senlaborulo]

pivot-to-ai.com
‘Can Artificial Intelligence Speak for Incapacitated Patients at the End of Life?’ No, and what the hell is wrong with you?
3–4 minutes

JAMA Internal Medicine presents an opinion article: “Can Artificial Intelligence Speak for Incapacitated Patients at the End of Life?” The authors, three doctors from UCSF, don’t seem to have heard of Betteridge’s Law: that any headline that’s a question has the answer “no.” [JAMA Internal Medicine, archive]

What the authors propose you do:

Take surveillance recordings of every interaction the patient had with a doctor while they could speak;
Run the AI-transcribed recordings through an AI trained on patient records (in violation of all regulations on patient confidentiality);
Determine the patient’s care from the output of a black box with a string of biases to guess what they might have wanted.

Inputs would also include “social media posts, church attendance, donations, travel records … internet search, and purchasing history.” Imagine dying from dank memes.

This is a story about the exciting possibilities of fobbing patients off with bots instead of doctors.

Picture the AI that will easily outdo mere overly emotional human judgment:

Algorithms — with thousands, millions, or even billions of direct observations of a person’s behavior — might actually paint a more authentic portrait of the way a person has lived, compared with a surrogate whose impression is often colored by acute psychological, emotional, and existential stress.

But consider: No they won’t, and what the hell are you talking about? You might as well base medical decisions for the general populace on their Facebook profiles. Add some hallucinations to taste. It’d save money!

Instead of “AI” or “algorithms,” the authors really mean “magic.” This is just the already-common AI seance scam.

Emily Bender, a linguist at the University of Washington, does the Mystery AI Hype Theater 3000 podcast and newsletter. She nails this article as “an AI hype artifact” — it only exists so the authors could get a journal publication credit from following a hype wave. [newsletter]

The article authors claim concern at these “nightmarish visions of a dystopian future.” But they first assume any of this would work or is even possible — then they call it “inevitable.” This conclusion is based on technology that does not exist and for which there is no present path for it to exist. Somehow, something that isn’t possible has become “inevitable” and they’re just asking questions.

JAMA Internal Medicine added an editor’s note that also tries to justify this reprehensible tripe as “inevitable.” They knew they needed an excuse for this obviously unethical article — and they make one that fails. A story being spooky isn’t enough to postulate this sort of patient abuse. [JAMA Internal Medicine, archive]

This article is a pitch to the malign hospital administrator set on freeing up a bed. The use case for AI is evading accountability.

https://pivot-to-ai.com/2024/07/31/can- ... -with-you/

[pigra senlaborulo]

news.wsu.edu
Using the term ‘artificial intelligence’ in product descriptions reduces purchase intentions
By Eric Hollenbeck, Carson College of Business
3–4 minutes

PULLMAN, Wash. – Companies may unintentionally hurt their sales by including the words “artificial intelligence” when describing their offerings that use the technology, according to a study led by Washington State University researchers.

In the study, published in the Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, researchers conducted experimental surveys with more than 1,000 adults in the U.S. to evaluate the relationship between AI disclosure and consumer behavior.

The findings consistently showed products described as using artificial intelligence were less popular, according to Mesut Cicek, clinical assistant professor of marketing and lead author of the study.

“When AI is mentioned, it tends to lower emotional trust, which in turn decreases purchase intentions,” he said. “We found emotional trust plays a critical role in how consumers perceive AI-powered products.”

In the experiments, the researchers included questions and descriptions across diverse product and service categories. For example, in one experiment, participants were presented with identical descriptions of smart televisions, the only difference being the term “artificial intelligence” was included for one group and omitted for the other. The group that saw AI included in the product description indicated they were less likely to purchase the television.

Researchers also discovered that negative response to AI disclosure was even stronger for “high-risk” products and services, those which people commonly feel more uncertain or anxious about buying, such as expensive electronics, medical devices or financial services. Because failure carries more potential risk, which may include monetary loss or danger to physical safety, mentioning AI for these types of descriptions may make consumers more wary and less likely to purchase, according to Cicek.

“We tested the effect across eight different product and service categories, and the results were all the same: it’s a disadvantage to include those kinds of terms in the product descriptions,” Cicek said.

Cicek said the findings provide valuable insights for companies.

“Marketers should carefully consider how they present AI in their product descriptions or develop strategies to increase emotional trust. Emphasizing AI may not always be beneficial, particularly for high-risk products. Focus on describing the features or benefits and avoid the AI buzzwords,” he said. In addition to Cicek, the study included co-authors Dogan Gursoy, professor of hospitality at WSU, and Lu Lu, associate professor at Temple University’s Fox School of Business and Management.

https://news.wsu.edu/press-release/2024 ... ntentions/