ChatGPT against the human touch: can AI take over our jobs?

ChatGPT against the human touch: can AI take over our jobs?

Industry insiders, observers acknowledge chatbot’s capabilities while pointing out its limitations

KUALA LUMPUR – As ChatGPT continues to astound the world with its ability to formulate accurate content within minutes, people are beginning to worry that it will take over human roles in numerous jobs.

The Vibes spoke to individuals whose careers are presumed to be the most susceptible to being replaced by the artificial intelligence (AI) language model – all of whom unanimously stressed the notion of “the human touch” to overcome that challenge.

A communication strategist and trainer who goes by the name Chee Seng commended ChatGPT at its current capability and opined that it will move up the value chain exponentially.

He added that some people’s reliance on the model allows it to grow rapidly to the point that it could surpass human abilities, but their writing prowess will rust as they opt for “shortcuts” instead of making an effort to better their skills.

“At its current iteration, ChatGPT can already replace most junior to mid-level writers in Malaysia,” he told The Vibes.

“The more writers rely on it, the better it becomes. At the same time, these writers have fewer opportunities to grow,” he added.

With 25 years of experience as a writer, Chee Seng emphasised that young and mid-level writers must improve their skills in tapping into human emotions.

“It can be learnt. This will give them breadth and depth of human experience and insight that will enable them to connect on a human level with audiences – something that AI will never be able to truly do,” he said.

iOli Communications Sdn Bhd public relations manager Shaerine Irwina Kaur said that ChatGPT may alter future industry job scopes, but will not disrupt careers as “AI will fall short of what a human can produce”.

Also a ChatGPT user, Shaerine said that while it is fast and somewhat accurate, its inability to generate personalised materials makes it a better tool for the initial phases of content creation.

“There is a lot of talk that AI will soon put writers out of work, but AI cannot generate real-life scenarios or customised content for a specific industry or brand, whereas a talent can,” she opined.

“When I tried a factual query, it was able to generate it very well, but when I asked a very customised question, the AI told me to search on relevant sources for better information.

“However, it is always better to prepare ourselves for what is to come and how we can use technology to enhance our knowledge,” she added.

In contrast, copywriter Magdalene Dilla does not utilise ChatGPT for her content creation, as she claims it takes away the genuineness of her work process.

“I’ve only used ChatGPT once, and I think what makes it different is that the level of writing is more advanced compared to the existing tools,” she said.

“This is why I don’t use it often, because if I use it for my work, it just doesn’t feel authentic,” she added.

ChatGPT in education

Meanwhile, Victoria University (VU) law and economics lecturer Dharshini Balasingam remarked that the writing styles of AI and students are not the same, and educators have a “sixth sense” in discerning between the two.

“There is a difference in writing style. If a student sends in work that is suspicious, it already raises red flags and we would investigate accordingly,” she said.

When asked whether ChatGPT could potentially replace educators, Dharshini said it cannot mimic individualised teaching.

“There are so many nuances (in teaching) that aren’t just stating information. We teach students how to think critically, present, and build skills,” she said.

“Students have a false impression of what learning is. Reading is not learning, you need to be able to comprehend and apply information in real-life scenarios,” she added.

Shedding light on humanity’s greatness, Dharshini claimed that we have one element that AI fails to compute: randomness.

“By our randomness, we can sometimes outsmart the ‘smart person’. AI is trained to think in a certain logical fashion, so if you go outside the realm of possibility, it cannot compute,” she said.

VU information systems for business lecturer Lim Fung Ching has a similar view, pointing out that educators can explain topics to students according to their level of understanding by using different methods.

With ChatGPT’s widespread success, Lim hypothesised that the AI industry will still compete in the interests of consumers.

“Who knows, AI will compete with each other to be used in the near future,” she said.

“If companies see that there is a market demand for it, they will start creating different types of the same AI,” she added.

Universiti Teknologi Mara Perak lecturer Norashikin Abdul Karim said that using ChatGPT to do assignments is a form of cheating and worries that students will become too reliant on the chatbot.

“I consider it as cheating, as it is copy-and-paste work,” said the interior design senior lecturer.

“Using ChatGPT is permissible as a source to get preliminary data and references, but students must never misuse the AI to do their work for them,” she added.

Norashikin, a recent PhD graduate, stated that ChatGPT may be helpful for undergraduate and pre-university students to obtain assistance with their assignments and gain knowledge.

However, she added that the AI has limitations for those doing their master’s degrees and PhDs, as it cannot create authentic theses and dissertations.

ChatGPT is a chatbot launched by an AI research company named OpenAI last November.

Its many features include composing music, writing essays, and answering test questions.

source – The Vibes

Share This


Wordpress (0)
Disqus (0 )