Why workers are nostalgic for life before AI

Do you miss your old working life, the one before AI muscled in?

Many do. Job hunters complain of the lack of the human touch as algorithms screen their applications and interviews are conducted by robo-recruiters. Some lament that generative AI has intensified work rather than given them room to breathe. In one study, “employees worked at a faster pace [and] took on a broader scope of tasks” due to AI. Others spurn it altogether, opting out of automated shortcuts because it makes them lazy-brained and contaminates their thinking.

Almost two-thirds (65 per cent) of white-collar workers regularly yearn for their old working life, according to consultancy Adaptavist. About a third would ditch GenAI for inhibiting creativity, its research finds, while a similar proportion worry about misuse. Almost half say the need to fact-check AI slop is adding to the slog — contrary to the grand promise that the future of work would dial down the drudgery.

While only a survey, the sentiment chimes. Putting together a coherent report at the touch of a button seems easy but verifying it, and pruning the dross, is a time suck. Just look at the proliferation of AI-generated LinkedIn posts. It’s not just that they have become formulaic but also interminably long. The alternative to checking is ridicule and even sanctions, as demonstrated by lawyers and consultants upbraided for including hallucinated cases in their legal arguments and reports.

The impact of the technology on creativity is worrying. Research into creative writing among the general population rather than professional novelists finds that GenAI may inspire more plot twists, but overall leads to a duplication of ideas and a homogeneity of stories. Another study on innovation by the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania found similar results — while the ideas improved, the diversity weakened, leading one author to warn that “if you rely on ChatGPT as your only creative adviser, you’ll soon run out of ideas,…