Exploring the Redundancy of AI

The excitement surrounding Generative AI is often built on its ability to replicate tasks that humans are already doing ineffectively. My journey began in 2010 when Automated Insights transitioned from creating advanced sports statistics visuals to automating sports content creation. This was the early groundwork for Generative AI, though we didn't recognize it at the time.

To showcase our innovative technology, we developed over 800 websites, each dedicated to a different pro or college sports team across the U.S. We populated these sites with automated content up to five times daily—game recaps, player highlights, and more. This garnered significant attention, as it was a novel approach.

However, the revenue was lacking since each team already had at least one human writer covering them. While our technology was impressive, it turned out to be redundant.

A fortunate turn of events occurred when smaller colleges began sending press releases whenever our automated writers highlighted their players as the week's best. This revealed the true potential: creating content in spaces where human coverage was lacking.

Presently, while humans can draft cold outreach emails, they often do so poorly. If AI replicates this, it will yield the same disappointing results, albeit at a lower cost. This reflects a prevalent trend in current Generative AI applications: producing substandard outcomes at reduced prices.

The Ineffectiveness of Cold Outreach

It’s no secret that I delete most sales outreach emails without a second glance. Here’s a tip: if someone claims they “came across” you, they likely bought your contact information from a dubious source.

To illustrate: “Hi Joe, I assure you I’m not a bot.” Frankly, I don’t care. In over two decades, I have never purchased anything, attended a webinar, or even replied to a cold email, whether from a human or an AI. While I understand that such methods might work for some, they are hardly necessary in today’s context.

The Content Quality Dilemma

Many share the frustration of sifting through low-quality content. Automated Insights thrived in various sectors not by replacing skilled writers, but by entering markets already saturated with poor-quality, SEO-driven content.

As we garnered media attention, we often reassured journalists that we were not here to take their jobs but to enhance their workflow.

Over a year ago, I remarked on the encroachment of Generative AI into content farms. Recently, when Sports Illustrated was caught utilizing AI-generated content, it became evident that the technology was primarily replacing low-quality promotional reviews.

The trend is clear: Generative AI is filling a void left by low-quality tasks, but at what cost? While it may seem like a cost-effective solution, the quality remains low. The reality is that Generative AI often provides a one-cent solution for tasks previously costing ten cents, delivering the same subpar quality.

Despite these challenges, any competent writer or content creator will affirm that bots cannot replicate the nuanced work of talented individuals. Experienced software developers see AI as a tool rather than a substitute, and sales professionals recognize that cold outreach is often ineffective.

Looking Forward

While AI continues to improve, I eagerly anticipate its evolution. My 15 years of experience tell me that as AI advances, the shortcomings of these redundant applications will become clearer. Ultimately, AI will be recognized as a supportive tool for talent, not as a replacement.

If this resonates with you and you’d like to explore more insights, consider joining my email list at joeprocopio.com.