Hello and welcome to Eye on AI! In this newsletter…Elon Musk is reportedly raising xAI funding at a $40 billion valuation... Microsoft's GitHub Copilot goes beyond OpenAI, striking deals with Anthropic and Google... AI ‘slop’ floods Medium... Apple Intelligence gets mixed reviews... U.S. finalizes rules to curb AI investments in China
A research paper has been making the rounds on social media that claims 40% of U.S. adults have used generative AI at work or at home, evidence that people are rapidly adopting generative AI tools. Indeed, the survey found the number is outpacing PC adoption in the early 80s, when just 20% of people used the then-new computers three years after they were introduced.
The paper, titled "The Rapid Adoption of Generative AI" and published last month by the National Bureau of Economic Research, comes from researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Vanderbilt University, and Harvard Kennedy School. It was based on responses from just over 5,000 people said to give a representative sample of the entire U.S. population.
But Arvind Narayanan, a Princeton University computer science professor and coauthor of the recently-released AI Snake Oil, called the paper a “hype case study” in a post on social media service X. The 40% figure, he pointed out, would include someone who simply asked ChatGPT to write a limerick once in the last month. The paper actually said only 0.5%-3.5% of work hours involved generative AI assistance—and only 24% of workers used it once in the last week prior to being surveyed, and only one in nine used it every workday.
“Compared to what AI boosters were predicting after ChatGPT was released, this is a glacial pace of adoption,” Narayanan wrote, adding that people spending thousands of dollars on early PCs were not just using them once a month.
Based on what I see in my own world, I agree with the more tempered view of AI adoption. Among the people I know, most are not using generative AI tools at all. Many don’t even know what I’m talking about if I mention a tool other than ChatGPT. In fact, my husband is actually among the few who would fall under the “super user” category that the Washington Post reported on yesterday. They're defined as people who use tools such as ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, or Anthropic's Claude regularly to learn new skills, create reports, analyze data, and research topics.
But I believe this will change relatively quickly. That’s because it’s becoming increasingly impossible for consumers to avoid generative AI text, image, audio, and video tools. If you use Google, you’re seeing AI Overviews with every search. Meanwhile, for months, Google Docs has been prompting me to use its AI assistant. Apple Intelligence just arrived for the iPhone, while Microsoft Copilot is in everything from Word to Excel. As for Meta, its AI assistant is inescapable on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Every day, consumers are breaking down and giving one of these tools a try and, intrigued by the results, might try again for another task.
I’ll give you an example: One of the most common questions people ask me is whether I use generative AI tools. The answer is yes, but so far I have only found them helpful for certain specific tasks. For example, headlines for articles are always hard to write, and sometimes I just want some feedback. For a long time, I would paste a tentative headline into ChatGPT and ask the AI to suggest a few other options and then I would edit from there.
The results were okay, but not always great. Finally, a few months ago I tried a new tack: I asked ChatGPT “What do you think of this headline?” The results are always really satisfying. For this essay, for example, I asked ChatGPT what it thought of the following: “Most people you know aren’t using generative AI. But nearly all are still experiencing it.”
ChatGPT responded with thoughts about what was working in my headline (contrast, intrigue, and relatability) as well as suggestions for refinement (something punchier with improved flow). It offered a few other options that I didn’t love, so I went back and forth with it a few times. Each time it got me closer to what I wanted (though my editor and I finally went in a different direction altogether).
Whether generative AI adoption reaches the rapid, mass adoption that companies and investors predicted remains to be seen. Some tools have been criticized as “half-baked” (like the New York Times said about Apple Intelligence’s new features yesterday). There will be plenty of generative AI products that bite the dust because users did not find them, well, useful. But good luck avoiding generative AI right now—it’s already everywhere, whether you are using it yet or not. Companies are crossing their fingers that you’ll give them a try, again and again.
With that, here’s more AI news.
Sharon Goldman
sharon.goldman@fortune.com
@sharongoldman
Request your invitation for the Fortune Global Forum in New York City on Nov. 11-12. Speakers include Honeywell CEO Vimal Kapur and Lumen CEO Kate Johnson who will be discussing AI's impact on work and the workforce. Qualtrics CEO Zig Serafin and Eric Kutcher, McKinsey's senior partner and North America chair, will be discussing how businesses can build the data pipelines and infrastructure they need to compete in the age of AI.
