I Helped Invent Generative AI, and I Know When You're Using ChatGPT

Look, here's the deal. I was part of a team that invented and released the first commercially available automated content/natural language generation/generative AI platform. Back in 2010. I have a patent. I'm incredibly proud of it. And I also apologize. Because I predicted this would happen. But more importantly, the reason I bring it up is that once we got the technology working and lined up customers like Yahoo Fantasy Football and the Associated Press, I spent most of my time, for a long time, working on algorithms and models and code to make the content sound less like it was generated by a machine. I think we did a great job with this. Like, we had decent individualized jokes when the customer let us write decent individualized jokes. You have no idea how hard that is. I'm not falling for the banana in the mainframe. But having done it -- man, it pains me to tell you this. I know when you're using ChatGPT. And what's more, it's not hard to figure out. And in a lot of cases, it's kinda making people look foolish. Emails and Messages If you send me a personal email written with ChatGPT, we're not friends anymore. So I'll just move on to business emails. Hey, sales guy. Sending me a ChatGPT-generated email is the equivalent of sending me an email that starts with "Hi there, FIRST NAME LAST NAME !!!" Oops. But it's even worse than the templated garbage you normally send because it forces me to wade into a lot of peripheral nonsense that whomever you paid too much money to code the sales email generating software thinks might get everyone to buy that same ChatGPT sales email generating software. I was just deleting your spam when it snuck through my filter. Now I'm mad at you. Context, sales guy. Context is everything on the way to close. Did no one teach you this? And all you're doing by generating fake, unrelated context is wasting my time. Time kills deals. That one I'm sure you know. Reviews and Comments OK, let me turn off the anger, because I'm only angry on your behalf. I'm faking it. It's a little writing trick I use. Speaking of writing, when people use ChatGPT or some equivalent to comment on my columns or posts, I see it in a second and I totally think it's 100-percent OK. I would never, ever push back against someone or criticize someone who takes the time to comment on one of my columns -- positive, negative, or machine-written. Because something I did made you take the time, and it's the time that is most important to me -- taking the time to read what I wrote, taking the time to respond. You're doing that for me, and I am grateful. OK. Anger back on. Let's talk about reviews. If you're getting paid or otherwise sponsored to use ChatGPT to write reviews of products and services, you are doing something unethical. Stop it. I wrote about this in a column a while back when Sports Illustrated got caught using bots and avatars to create content. Having started my own automated content journey in sports, I saw no problem with this. Especially when we did something like recaps for Little League games. We made heroes out of kids and kept traveling moms and dads in the loop. But what I did see as a problem -- and what everyone missed, and why the hammer rightfully came down -- was that SI was using bots and avatars to write sponsored product reviews. I don't care whether the reviewer is using ChatGPT as a helper or is just straight up a bot, which obviously would never have had any contact with the product or service. If the reviewer can't conjure the words that describe the emotions and utility involved with actually using the product, they are not a reviewer. They are writing advertising copy, poorly, and they are lying to you. Articles and Posts No, ChatGPT, you can GTFOH. Words mean things. That's why we invented them. And if someone strings together just a few of them that don't mean anything, it's very easy to detect, and it's very obvious that someone's content is being written by a machine. I spent days, weeks, and months trying to hide word salad in our automated content platform. I got maybe 60-percent of the way there. Maybe. Résumés and Cover Letters I can't honestly call this a bad idea, because the whole hiring landscape is a quagmire of minefield and quicksand right now. But again, I can tell when someone has used ChatGPT to put together a résumé, and so can recruiters and HR people. What's more, it's antithetical to the purpose of both the résumé and the cover letter, since both are meant to show you took the time to align your skills and desires with the requirements and opportunities presented in the job requisition. Oh, and if you're using ChatGPT to write the job requisition itself, again, get all the way out of here. Personal Connection Matters One of the things I constantly hammered home to my team was to never forget the personal connection that is the purpose of any kind of content, including that written by a machine. Don't create content for content's sake, no matter how targeted or individualized or personalized it may be. I'd rather see a single sentence that means something rather than a bunch of paragraphs that don't. There is a time and place for generative AI. Our company was called Automated Insights, because we were automating insights, not words. Words were secondary to what we were doing. Those words were always meant to be read by people so that they could more easily understand the data behind them and make their own decisions. Today's generative AI isn't doing that. Not well anyway. It's being sold as a replacement for the personal connection that matters in many forms of communication. And when we forget why we invented words, well, we deserve all the word salad we can eat. Expert Opinion By Joe Procopio, Founder, TeachingStartup.com @jproco

79 Percent of CEOs Say Remote Work Will Be Dead in 3 Years or Less

The 53 percent of employed Americans who work from home at least some of the time may be in for a rude awakening. In a new KPMG survey, a whopping 79 percent of U.S. corporate CEOs predicted that corporate roles that were performed in the office before the pandemic will be back in office full time within the next three years. Just a few months ago, only 34 percent thought that would be true. If you're an entrepreneur and you're willing to have employees work from home at least part of the time, this could signal a coming opportunity to hire top talent away from larger companies. The surveyed CEOs may have been emboldened by softening in the labor market and a recent wave of return-to-office mandates from major tech employers. That wave continues. After the survey was completed in August, Amazon announced that most employees would be required to work in the office five days a week, beginning next year. The corporate CEOs in the KPMG survey are in a position to make their own return-to-office predictions come true, and apparently many plan to do just that. Eighty-six percent of them said they would reward in-office employees with plum assignments, raises, and promotions. That suggests they intend to withhold those same things from employees who choose to work from home. But at a time when the vast majority of corporate CEOs seem ready to drive a stake through the heart of remote and hybrid work, working from home remains hugely popular among employees, including senior managers. Among other things, that's evident in the response so far to Amazon's return-to-office mandate. Some employees went directly to LinkedIn to declare themselves "open to work." RTO mandates can be layoffs in disguise. Of course, that's the real motivation behind some return-to-work orders. The entirely predictable departure of a large cohort of employees who don't want to or can't work in the office five days a week is a painless way to reduce head count without the muss and fuss of layoffs. But that's likely not the case for the CEO respondents in KPMG's survey. It seems improbable that they predicted remote work's demise out of a desire to reduce their workforce years in the future. Apparently, they genuinely hate having people work outside the office even one day a week. They hate it so much that they're willing to punish employees who do so by holding back raises and promotions. So much that, like Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, they're willing to see some of their top talent go elsewhere. What makes remote work so distasteful to such a large number of corporate CEOs? My Inc.com colleague Suzanne Lucas says it's harder to manage remote employees than ones you see every day, and that may well be true. Whatever the explanation, the continuing rollback of remote work options at larger employers creates a rare opportunity for startups and smaller employers to recruit employees who have sought-after skills. If you're willing to let people work at home at least one or two days a week, you can offer them a perk they really, really want, and that will cost you nothing at all. Expert Opinion By Minda Zetlin, Author of 'Career Self-Care: Find Your Happiness, Success, and Fulfillment at Work' @MindaZetlin

A new survey says Gen-Z has wildly unrealistic salary expectations. Here's what you can do, as an employer.

As an employer, it's your job to navigate your employees' salary expectations and raise requests. But it turns out Gen-Z has some wild views about salaries. In fact, a new survey highlights just how out of sync with reality many in Gen-Z are. The survey, from software company Pollfish, asked 750 childless Gen-Zers who are employed full-time about their income and finances. What they discovered was fascinating and concerning at the same time. Now, keep in mind all the caveats about small samples and such, but take a look at some of the interesting results: 100 percent of those earning $30,000 a year felt their pay was fair. 100 percent of those earning over $30,000 a year felt they were paid too little. Of those who feel underpaid: Around 9 percent believe they should be paid up to $40,000 annually, 17 percent expect between $40,000 and $50,000, 20 percent want between $50,000 and $70,000, 35 percent believe they should earn between $70,000 and $100,000, and 20 percent feel they should be paid over $100,000. 40 percent say they cannot meet their basic needs Those who say they cannot meet their basic needs spend an average of $372 per month on unnecessary items. It's time for some financial literacy education -- even if you have to be the one to supply it. Salary expectations don't reflect reality The average salary in the United States is $59,428. The average salary by location varies, of course, with the high-cost-of-living places typically boasting higher salaries. But that is the average overall. For over half of people under 27 to think they should be earning that much reflects a lack of understanding. Who is to blame for this? Schools don't tend to give students realistic ideas of what they will earn upon graduation. College students expect to earn $84,855 one year post-graduation, when the average starting salary for someone with a college degree is $55,911. While it would be great for high schools and colleges to give clear information about expected salaries, they don't. (Think of the impact if, next to every major, they listed the median salary for someone who has had that degree for one year!) Businesses, on the other hand, can take care of this problem by clearly listing accurate salary ranges on all job postings. It would cease to be a mystery. Plus, there aren't huge ranges for most entry-level positions, as the definition of entry-level is for someone with minimal or no experience. If businesses listed jobs at "$55-$57,000 per year" instead of "$45-$65,000 per year," Gen-Z -- and everyone else -- would have a much better idea of what certain positions are worth. Financial literacy classes That said, it's not your responsibility to educate Gen-Z employees. Parents, schools, and career advisors should have all taught Gen-Z what to expect and how to manage their finances. They don't always do this. And when you have employees -- and remember, this is a survey of people employed full-time -- who feel like they cannot meet their basic needs and yet are spending $372 a month or more on things that they themselves feel are unnecessary, there would seem to be a financial disconnect. Yes, everyone is tired of the idea that if you skip your morning coffee shop latte and avocado toast you can buy a house. We all know that's not true. However, there needs to be some understanding of saving for unexpected expenses, like cars breaking down or medical bills. And yes, those avocado toasts and restaurant lunches do add up. While you shouldn't get directly involved in your employees' finances, holding lunch-and-learns about basic financial literacy, investing, and taxes can make a big difference. And if you have one, let people know that your Employee Assistance Program can help them figure things out. Career pathing Gen-Z wants work-life balance, but at the same time also want to "create value, to contribute to their job and become leaders and experts." Wanting to become leaders is a great goal, but you don't just step into your first job as a leader. That type of stuff is earned. Working with your employees -- especially new employees -- to discuss career paths and what they need to do to be promoted and reach those leadership levels can help bring them back to reality. You're not going to get the VP salary until you've done the VP work. Once people understand that, they'll better understand what they need to do to rise in the organization (and secure raises). Knowledge, as they say, is power. You're ultimately responsible for paying all your employees a far market rate salary. And you're responsible for treating your employees well. Their finances are also their business, at the end of the day. But you can make it easier for everyone -- not just Gen-Z -- when you do these few basic things.

Klarna Plans to 'Shut Down SaaS Providers' and Replace Them With Internally Built AI. The Tech World Is Pretty Skeptical

The fintech firm Klarna is severing its relationships with two of the biggest enterprise software providers in favor of automating its services with AI. And the company says it could potentially eliminate more. Klarna co-founder and CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski recently explained the rationale in a conference call, the financial outlet Seeking Alpha reported. Klarna is no longer using Salesforce, a platform that aggregates and packages sales and marketing data for businesses. The company has also removed the HR and hiring platform Workday from its tech stack, a Klarna spokesperson confirmed to Inc. This may be only the beginning of Klarna's automation spree. "We have a number of large internal initiatives that combine AI, standardization, and simplification to enable us to shut down several software-as-a-service providers," said a spokesperson, who did not mention other areas or providers Klarna could eliminate. Klarna, founded in 2005, provides payment processing for e-commerce. The company says it has more than 150 million global active users. Klarna's losses were $241 million last year, according to the company's annual report. That was down from 2022, when the company lost nearly $1 billion. For its half-year earnings of 2024, the company reported a net loss of $32 million. With reports that the company has tapped Goldman Sachs to underwrite its initial public offering, it's possible Klarna's AI push for profitability will make it a better candidate. It's also not the first AI-centered flex made by the Swedish startup. In February, Klarna unveiled an AI-powered assistant for customer service. The firm lauded its product, writing that it performed the work of 700 customer service agents and handled 2.3 million interactions in its first month of operation. The assistant was made in collaboration with OpenAI. Klarna was one of the first clients for OpenAI's enterprise ChatGPT package, and claims that 90 percent of its workforce consult the tool every day to automate various processes on the job. Slashing Workday and Salesforce is part of a broader purge of third-party SaaS providers. Klarna intends to replace the programs with its own, internally built applications, ostensibly crafted on OpenAI's infrastructure. Siemiatkowski reportedly said on the August call: "We are shutting down a lot of our SaaS providers as we are able to consolidate." Siemiatkowski is the chairman of the board at Flat Capital, a Swedish venture firm that counts OpenAI among its portfolio companies. HR technology analyst Josh Bersin is skeptical that the payments company can effectively replace Workday. "Systems like Workday have decades of workflows and complex data structures built in, including payroll, time and attendance," he explained to Inc. "If Klarna wants an engineering team to build all this, they're going to wind up in a black hole of systems features, to say nothing of the user experience." Many others across the tech world are skeptical that Klarna can execute such a coup. Investors and executives argued in social-media posts that Klarna's directive is more of a PR offensive than a technological breakthrough. "Klarna ripping out Salesforce + Workday... even if it's true, is it actually the best use of capital to rebuild in-house? Feels like a massive distraction," wrote financial insights account BuccoCapital on X. "Especially when your business has no path to selling the in-house solution. I'm deeply skeptical the math works," the post continued. "Klarna CEO hooked on free marketing," wrote Ryan Jones, CEO of the flight tracking app Flighty. The most scathing takes suggest Klarna's AI revamp is just bluster as it prepares to go public: Klarna reduced its workforce by 1,200 workers over the past year, and Siemiatkowski hasn't been shy about the need for further downsizing. He told the Financial Times last month that the firm could benefit by reducing its headcount from 3,800 to 2,000 employees. He has insisted downsizing wouldn't slow growth as the company leans into AI. If Klarna goes forward developing its own internal HR platform, it would be succeeding where many of the biggest tech giants have failed, says Bersin. "Google is doing away with their internally developed HR software and Amazon goes through these cycles regularly. Microsoft spends their money on their own products and works in partnership with SAP for all their HR software," Bersin says.