"And perhaps that was Minsky's most lasting contribution of 1982: while others were busy proving machines could perform specific tasks — play chess, solve equations, diagnose diseases — he insisted on asking the bigger question. Not whether machines could match human intelligence, but whether the very act of trying to create thinking machines might transform human consciousness itself. His position was that the enterprise of artificial intelligence wasn't just about building smarter computers — it was about expanding the boundaries of what it meant to be human."
Makes me wonder today with AI-automated BDR teams, if we are missing the point today as well
Ved Shankar, definitely makes me wonder that too. Minsky was suggesting that while everyone else was caught up in the "can we?" of AI, they were missing the more interesting "what happens to us?" question. It's fascinating that 40+ years later, we might be making a similar mistake with the rush to embrace things like AI-automated BDR teams.
When we focus solely on whether AI can effectively make sales calls or send follow-up emails, we're essentially still playing the "can we?" game. The more intriguing question might be: How does automating these deeply human interactions reshape our understanding of what sales, relationships, and business development actually mean?
Minsky would probably argue that the real story isn't about AI replacing BDR teams - it's about how the very existence of AI in this space is forcing us to examine and articulate what makes human business relationships valuable in the first place.
That being said, it is a challenge to carve out the time and space to ‘examine’ and ‘articulate’ – especially with the speed of business transformation.
For me, that’s one of the reasons I try and prioritize reading fiction -- it sort of forces me to make that space. Similarly, in writing this newsletter, I've forced myself to examine these things a bit more, especially when it comes to AI being used for creative work like writing, etc.
"And perhaps that was Minsky's most lasting contribution of 1982: while others were busy proving machines could perform specific tasks — play chess, solve equations, diagnose diseases — he insisted on asking the bigger question. Not whether machines could match human intelligence, but whether the very act of trying to create thinking machines might transform human consciousness itself. His position was that the enterprise of artificial intelligence wasn't just about building smarter computers — it was about expanding the boundaries of what it meant to be human."
Makes me wonder today with AI-automated BDR teams, if we are missing the point today as well
Ved Shankar, definitely makes me wonder that too. Minsky was suggesting that while everyone else was caught up in the "can we?" of AI, they were missing the more interesting "what happens to us?" question. It's fascinating that 40+ years later, we might be making a similar mistake with the rush to embrace things like AI-automated BDR teams.
When we focus solely on whether AI can effectively make sales calls or send follow-up emails, we're essentially still playing the "can we?" game. The more intriguing question might be: How does automating these deeply human interactions reshape our understanding of what sales, relationships, and business development actually mean?
Minsky would probably argue that the real story isn't about AI replacing BDR teams - it's about how the very existence of AI in this space is forcing us to examine and articulate what makes human business relationships valuable in the first place.
That being said, it is a challenge to carve out the time and space to ‘examine’ and ‘articulate’ – especially with the speed of business transformation.
For me, that’s one of the reasons I try and prioritize reading fiction -- it sort of forces me to make that space. Similarly, in writing this newsletter, I've forced myself to examine these things a bit more, especially when it comes to AI being used for creative work like writing, etc.