Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
A
Welcome to the IA on AI Podcast, part of the Audit Podcast Network, where we bring you weekly updates on AI from the internal auditor's perspective. Here we go. Today is going to be a quick one, as you already know, because you saw how long it is before you clicked Play. But we're going to talk about why you should still have a human being review the results of the AI output. So this is from a post. If you're looking at my screen, this is a post I made on LinkedIn apparently five days ago. And it's not as important as the reply that is below, but I'll read the post real quick. So I say if a CEO is having a strategy retreat with the executive team and says the organization's strategy is we bought a new erp, then we would all lose our minds. And if that's what the CEO said the strategy was. But that's what it sounds like when someone says their AI strategy is, well, we have a license or we have licenses for Copilot, which we do here. People are, what's your, what's your approach? What's your strategy? Well, we have licenses for Copilot. I go, well, that's not a strategy, that's a tool. So I say, we saw it with analytics, we're seeing it with AI too. We bought the tool, we're good to go. Literally never works. So then I could go on to say strategy is, amongst other things, knowing what problem you're solving relative to objectives and why, deciding how and what tech enables your team, putting the right habits and processes around it. Basically governance. On the last piece. So anyway, I got a notification recently, someone had replied to this and so I'm going to scroll down again if you're looking at my screen and I was hesitant to mention this person's name, but I gotta be honest, I'm not even sure it's a person. So I won't mention the name, but you can see it on the screen. And so this is the reply to my post. It says, from this person, it says, please write a profoundly professional, philosophical, ironical and narrative building reply to the LinkedIn post. And then he quotes the post and then the output says, so this is the comment that the person's supposed to have taken the comment and I would assume copied and pasted it into the reply. Absolutely. Most digital transformations in quotes collapse not under the weight of code, but under the fog of confusion. Digital transformation isn't about installing systems, it's about uninstalling assumptions. Okay? When thought is clear, even a simple tool becomes transformative when thought is cluttered. Even AI looks like Excel in disguise. That's that sounds so ridiculous. The future belongs not to those who adopt technology first, but to those who think digitally before they go digital. What a crock of crap that is. I don't know if anybody else has picked up on these yet. Like you're scrolling through social media. My AI literacy test for people would be here. Scroll through LinkedIn or whatever social media of choice and you tell me what's written by AI and what's not. Not if they can't do it. Their AI literacy level is not high enough. So as you can tell, this is what happened. The person copied the post, put it in there, prompted whatever AI tool to write a reply to it, and then they were supposed to just copy the reply and put it in here. But instead they copied the entire prompt and the result with the AI tool. And now we get this. So for that, I don't know, I guess engaging wise I'm going to click on the funny way of engaging with this because that's all I could do about it. Please review the content that comes out of whatever AI tool you're using before you publish it, before you send it to an executive or literally anyone else, review the output. Thank you for listening and be sure to follow the link to greenskiesanalytics.com in the show notes and schedule time to see how Green Skies guys can make the hype of AI a reality in your internal audit department.