Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Appears well balanced

Article summary:

1. Erik Brynjolfsson, professor and senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, warned against using AI without human oversight at the Davos World Economic Forum.

2. He advised companies to use AI carefully and in conjunction with human control, as it can affect job quality and wages.

3. He also suggested that businesses should embrace AI tools such as ChatGPT, but keep humans in the loop to ensure accuracy and prevent demoralization of workers.

Article analysis:

The article is generally reliable and trustworthy, as it provides a balanced view of the potential risks associated with using artificial intelligence (AI) without human oversight. The author cites Erik Brynjolfsson's warnings about the dangers of this practice, as well as his advice to use AI carefully in conjunction with human control. The article also mentions other experts on the panel who provided their own perspectives on how businesses should approach AI technology, such as Martin Sorrell's suggestion that HR will be heavily taxed by this technology, and Lauren Woodman's concern that there is too much commercial pressure to jump into AI quickly.

The article does not appear to have any biases or one-sided reporting; instead it presents both sides of the argument equally. It acknowledges potential risks associated with using AI without human oversight, while also noting potential benefits such as increased productivity and wages for lower-skilled workers. The article also provides evidence for its claims by citing research from Cresta which showed that when humans were kept at the forefront with AI behind giving prompts, firms did better in terms of productivity and closed the wage gap between skilled and unskilled workers.

The only potential issue with the article is that it does not explore any counterarguments or missing points of consideration regarding its claims about using AI responsibly. However, overall it is a reliable source of information on this topic which provides an unbiased view of both sides of the argument.