 |
|
|
|||||
Imagine two interns. The first follows instructions to the lettercompiling research, scheduling social media posts, and managing your calendar. The second completes the same tasks but takes it a step furtherfinding additional research sources, streamlining the social media workflow, and proactively suggesting optimal meeting times based on past interactions and behaviors. These two interns, with their overlapping but distinct capabilities, capture the essence of automation versus AI. Both liberate users from tedious manual work, but only one, with its built-in autonomy, is changing the nature of how we interact with technology. At Jotform, weve incorporated automation and AI into our daily processeswe also offer both types of solutions to users. Heres how each serves a unique purposeand how you can leverage them to work smarter. Automation versus AI Im a strong proponent of automation. Its the foundation of my career and my company. I even wrote a book about itto show how automation can free people from the dull, repetitive parts of their jobs. But automation itself is nothing new. Over a century ago, Henry Ford revolutionized manufacturing with the moving assembly line, cutting production time for the Model T from 12 hours to just 90 minutes. That was mechanical automationa system designed to streamline repetitive tasks. The 21st century brought a similar revolution to knowledge work. If you break down your daily workflows, youll likely find parts that can be automated using the right tools or technology. Take a reporter covering breaking news: instead of manually checking for updates every half hour, she sets up Google Alerts to track developments in real-time. Or consider a recruiter: rather than sifting through thousands of applications, they use a tool like Harver to automatically screen candidates based on preset criteria, bringing the most promising applicants to the fore. When I published my book in 2023, we were only beginning to grasp AIs potential. Fast-forward to today, and tools like ChatGPT have evolved dramaticallyexcelling in speed, accuracy, memory, and multimodal capabilities. Automation executes tasks. AI mimics human thinking and reasoning. AI doesnt just follow instructions; it reasons, adapts, and makes decisions. And now, AI agents are taking things a step furtheroperating autonomously, dynamically reasoning through complex situations, and acting without human intervention. I like the analogy Google used in a recent white paper: agents are like chefsgathering ingredients, planning a dish, and making adjustments as they cook. I would add that automation is like a line cookhighly efficient, but following instructions rather than innovating. In todays workplace, automation and AI complement each other. The real power comes in knowing when to use which. Leveraging their strengths Painting with broad strokes, automation tools are ideal for repetitive tasks that require clear, rule-based actions. For instance, you can set an automation tool to redirect any email containing X to a specific folder or flag any X security issue in a system for review by a human employee. Automation shines when it comes to tasks meant to be executed consistently and without variation. AI tools, on the other hand, can add a human-like reasoning element to a task or workflow. Its ideal for situations that require dynamic responses. For example, imagine an AI agent that doesnt just transcribe your meetings, but also provides a personalized recap, compiles action items, and even drafts follow-up emailsall tailored to your role in the organization or meeting. While executing tasks, the agent applies judgment and adapts as it goes. The beauty of agents, the latest advance in AI, is the power to design them based on your unique needs and circumstances. For instance, I wanted an AI agent to help wrangle my email inbox, so I built one according to my personal goals: parsing out spam, flagging time-sensitive messages, and redirecting items to read later. That way, I can check email twice or three times a day, knowing Ill be alerted about any urgent messages. I redirect my focus to more impactful work that requires deep focus. So, is AI always the best option? Not necessarily. Consider it like using a laser cutter for a task that a pair of scissors could handle perfectly well. Sometimes, the added investment in AI tools isnt justified when simpler automation will do the trick. It starts with mapping out your workflows and deciding which type of task youd like to delegatewhether it requires mere execution or a higher level of judgment and reasoning. Final thoughts Automation and AI are two sides of the same coinoffloading work that doesnt require your direct involvement and recapturing more time for meaningful tasks involving creativity and strategic thinking. By removing boring, tedious work from your plate, they also serve in the battle against burnout, which has become all too common in a world obsessed with busyness. The key is knowing when to use each. If automation improves your efficiency, AI tools can boost your reasoning and decision-making. Combined, AI and automation dont just save time; they change how we approach work.
Category:
E-Commerce
Netflix fared better than analysts anticipated during the first three months of the year, signaling the world’s largest video streaming service is still thriving as President Donald Trump’s policies cast a pall on the economy.The numbers released Thursday indicated Netflix is still building on the momentum that enabled it to add 41 million worldwide subscribers last yearthe biggest annual gain in the company’s 27-year history.But it’s unclear precisely how many more subscribers Netflix picked up during the January-March period because this report marks the first time that that the Los Gatos, California, company hasn’t provided a quarterly update on its total subscribers.Netflix announced last year it would no longer report subscriber numbers beginning with this quarter as the company seeks to shift investors’ focus to its profits after topping 300 million global subscribers in December. As part of that emphasis, Netflix is working to sell more advertising to supplement subscription dollars.Netflix’s sharper focus on its finances paid off in this year’s first quarter with earnings of $2.9 billion, or $6.61 per share, a 24% increase from from the same time last year. Revenue climbed 13% from the same time last year to $10.54 billion. Both numbers exceeded forecasts compiled by FactSet Research. Without providing details, Netflix cited ongoing subscriber growth as the main reason for its strong start this year.The robust growth came against a background of economic chaos and Trump’s fluctuating trade war. The tech industry has been hit particularly hard by the sweeping tariffs that Trump unveiled April 2 because so many bellwether companies rely on international supply chains that have been provided some relief by temporary freezes and exemptions from the fees.But Netflix’s global streaming service hasn’t been touched by Trump’s tariffs yet, making the company a notable exception that has enabled its stock price to increase 9% so far this year, while the market values of most other major tech companies have plummeted.“Netflix remains a standout in an otherwise volatile tech landscape,” said Andrew Rocco, a who tracks the stock market for Zacks Investment Research.The company’s shares rose nearly 3% in extended trading after its report came out.The trade war could still hurt Netflix if it triggers a recession or fuels inflationary pressures as many economists fear. In those scenarios, more consumers may curtail their discretionary spending on entertainment.The economic volatility could also result in a slowdown in advertising to the detriment of Netflix’s efforts to sell more commercials for a low-priced version of its streaming service that accounted for most of its last year’s subscriber growth.“We’re paying close attention clearly to the consumer sentiment and where the broader economy is moving,” Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters said during a Thursday conference call. “But based on what we are seeing by actually operating the business right now, there’s nothing really significant to note.”Peters also said Netflix’s low-cost option, currently priced at $8 per month in the U.S., should help insulate its video streaming service if households start tightening their belts.In a sign of its confidence, Netflix reaffirmed its previous prediction for annual revenue of roughly $44 billion, up 13% from 2024.“Historically in tougher economies, home entertainment value is really important to consumer households,” Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos noted during the conference call. Michael Liedtke, AP Technology Writer
Category:
E-Commerce
Donald Trump has stepped up his attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell at the same time that the Supreme Court is considering a case that could make it easier for the president to fire him.The developments are occurring against a backdrop of wider turmoil in the economy and financial markets, brought on by Trump’s sweeping taxes on imports. Most economists worry that an assault on the Fed’s longstanding independence from politics would further disrupt markets and add to the uncertainty enveloping the economy.In comments at the White House Thursday, Trump suggested he has the power to remove Powell and criticized him for not aggressively cutting interest rates.“If I want him out, he’ll be out of there real fast, believe me,” Trump said. “I’m not happy with him.”All the scrutiny threatens the Fed’s venerated independence, which has long been supported by most economists and Wall Street investors. Here are some questions and answers about the Fed. Why does the Fed’s independence matter? The Fed wields extensive power over the U.S. economy. By cutting the short-term interest rate it controlswhich it typically does when the economy faltersthe Fed can make borrowing cheaper and encourage more spending, accelerating growth and hiring. When it raises the ratewhich it does to cool the economy and combat inflationit can weaken the economy and cause job losses.Economists have long preferred independent central banks because they can more easily take unpopular steps to fight inflation, such as raise interest rates, which makes borrowing to buy a home, car, or appliance more expensive.The importance of an independent Fed was cemented for most economists after the extended inflation spike of the 1970s and early 1980s. Former Fed Chair Arthur Burns has been widely blamed for allowing the painful inflation of that era to accelerate by succumbing to pressure from President Richard Nixon to keep rates low heading into the 1972 election. Nixon feared higher rates would cost him the election, which he won in a landslide.Paul Volcker was eventually appointed chair of the Fed in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter, and he pushed the Fed’s short-term rate to the stunningly high level of nearly 20%. (It is currently 4.3%). The eye-popping rates triggered a sharp recession, pushed unemployment to nearly 11%, and spurred widespread protests.Yet Volcker didn’t flinch. By the mid-1980s, inflation had fallen back into the low single digits. Volcker’s willingness to inflict pain on the economy to throttle inflation is seen by most economists as a key example of the value of an independent Fed. What do Wall Street investors think? An effort to fire Powell would almost certainly cause stock prices to fall and bond yields to spike higher, pushing up interest rates on government debt and raising borrowing costs for mortgages, auto loans, and credit card debt.Most investors prefer an independent Fed, partly because it typically manages inflation better without being influenced by politics but also because its decisions are more predictable. Fed officials often publicly discuss how they would alter interest rate policies if economic conditions changed.If the Fed was more swayed by politics, it would be harder for financial markets to anticipateor understandits decisions. So does that mean the Fed is completely unaccountable? Well, no. Fed chairs like Powell are appointed by the president to serve four-year terms, and have to be confirmed by the Senate. The president also appoints the six other members of the Fed’s governing board, who can serve staggered terms of up to 14 years, though most governors leave before the end of their terms.Those appointments can allow a president over time to significantly alter the Fed’s policies. Former president Joe Biden appointed five of the current seven members: Powell, Lisa Cook, Philip Jefferson, Adriana Kugler, and Michael Barr. As a result, Trump will have fewer opportunities to make appointments. He will be able to replace Kugler, who filled an unexpired term ending January 31, 2026.Congress, meanwhile, can set the Fed’s goals through legislation. In 1977, for example, Congress gave the Fed a “dual mandate” to keep prices stable and seek maximum employment. The Fed defines stable prices as inflation at 2%.The 1977 law also requires the Fed chair to testify before the House and Senate twice every year about the economy and interest rate policy. But can the president fire Powell? Powell says the law establishing the Fed does not allow a president to fire a chair except for cause. There is some complication in that Powell was separately appointed as a member of the Fed’s board of governors, and then elevated to the position of chairby Trump, in 2017.Most legal scholars agree that Trump can’t fire Powell from the Fed’s board of governors, but there is less agreement over whether a president can remove him as chair. In January, Michael Barr, who was vice chair for supervision, stepped down from that post but remained on the board to avoid a potential legal clash over whether Trump could fire him.Should Trump try to fire Powell anyway, the ensuing fight would almost certainly end up at the Supreme Court. What could the Supreme Court do? We may get an early sign of how the Supreme Court would decide it this summer. There is already a case before the court on the issue of whether the president can fire top officials at independent agencies.The case stems from Trump’s firings of two officials, one from the National Labor Relations Board and the other from an agency that protects workers from political interference. The Supreme Court last week let the firings stand while it considers the case. It could rule this summer that the president, as the head of the executive branch, could fire officials at any federal agency even if Congress had intended it to be independent.The case would overturn a 90-year old precedent known as Humphrey’s Executor, in which the court ruled that the president couldn’t fire such officials.Powell said Wednesday he is watching the case closely, adding that it might not apply to the Fed. Lawyers for the Trump administration, seeking to narrow the focus of the case, have argued that it doesn’t involve the Fed.Both the Trump administration and the Supreme Court justices have carved out exemptions for the Fed before. In February, the White House issued an executive order that placed several financial regulatory agencies, including the Fed and the Securities and Exchange Commission, more directly under the president’s control. Yet the order specifically exempted the Fed’s ability to set interest rates from that order.And in a case in 2023, Justice Samuel Alito said in a footnote that the Fed is a “unique institution with a unique historical background” that made it different than other independent bodies. If the court does give presidents more poer over the heads of independent agencies, it could potentially exempt the Fed. Christopher Rugaber, AP Economics Writer
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||