Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Get exclusive access to thought-provoking articles, bonus podcast content, and cutting-edge whitepapers. Become a member of the UX Magazine community today!

Home ›› AI Brings Cheap Prediction, Expensive Change

AI Brings Cheap Prediction, Expensive Change

by Josh Tyson
2 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

Most organizations are implementing AI as point solutions, dropping new technology into existing workflows to do the same work, just slightly better. But the real value, and the real disruption, lies in system solutions that completely transform how organizations operate.

Avi Goldfarb, economist and co-author of Prediction Machines, joins Robb and Josh to explain why AI adoption follows predictable economic principles and why internal resistance, not technology limitations, is the primary barrier to transformation.

Goldfarb’s core argument: AI is fundamentally cheap prediction. Just as the internet made search and copying cheap, AI makes prediction cheap. When something becomes a commodity, the complements, the things that work alongside it, become more valuable. This includes compute power (benefiting Microsoft, Amazon, Google), unique data, and crucially, human judgment.

The problem? System solutions require organizational transformation. They create winners and losers inside companies. When AI enables insurance companies to shift from pricing risk (the domain of powerful underwriters) to reducing risk (requiring marketing and behavior change expertise), the power structure fractures. Vested interests resist. Departments see their importance diminished. Political problems emerge.

Point solutions avoid this friction by leaving organizational structure intact. They’re easier to implement but capture minimal value. System solutions deliver transformation but demand confronting internal resistance and redesigning workflows, supply chains, and power dynamics across the enterprise.

Goldfarb also addresses a hopeful possibility: unlike previous technologies that were skill-biased (favoring educated workers), generative AI might be upscaling, lifting capabilities for massive populations by making writing, coding, and communication accessible to those previously constrained by those barriers.

For leaders evaluating AI investments, the question isn’t whether to adopt AI, it’s whether you’re willing to pursue system transformation and confront the organizational disruption that creates real value. This conversation explores those dynamics in depth.

post authorJosh Tyson

Josh Tyson
Josh Tyson is the co-author of the first bestselling book about conversational AI, Age of Invisible Machines. He is also the Director of Creative Content at OneReach.ai and co-host of both the Invisible Machines and N9K podcasts. His writing has appeared in numerous publications over the years, including Chicago Reader, Fast Company, FLAUNT, The New York Times, Observer, SLAP, Stop Smiling, Thrasher, and Westword. 

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Related Articles

How the most intentional designers are working with AI — and why “vibe coding” really needs a better name.

Article by Jim Gulsen
Beyond Vibe Coding: A Designer’s Case for Directed Generation
  • The term “vibe coding” initially described an unstructured approach with minimal accountability, which doesn’t apply to professional design. It risks oversimplifying AI-assisted processes, ignoring the intentionality and expertise involved in high-level design. 
  • In practice, designers engage in “directed generation,” setting clear constraints, selecting references, and refining details. The AI model follows the designer’s guidance rather than taking initiative.
Share:Beyond Vibe Coding: A Designer’s Case for Directed Generation
7 min read

Every time you drafted a design brief, stating the goal, audience, constraints, and context, you were doing precisely what good AI prompting entails. There is a change of recipient. The ability is identical.

Article by Tushar Deshmukh
The Prompt Is the New Brief
  • “Prompt engineering” can sound like a technical skill, but that image is not always accurate. In practice, good prompting is very much like writing a good design brief. Both require setting a goal, defining a target audience, setting constraints, providing context, and establishing evaluation criteria.
  • Designers are already doing these activities in practice. They have skills in writing briefs that they have developed during their careers that directly translate to fluency in AI prompting – they just might not have made the connection.
Share:The Prompt Is the New Brief
17 min read

Join the UX Magazine community!

Stay informed with exclusive content on the intersection of UX, AI agents, and agentic automation—essential reading for future-focused professionals.

Hello!

You're officially a member of the UX Magazine Community.
We're excited to have you with us!

Thank you!

To begin viewing member content, please verify your email.

Get Paid to Test AI Products

Earn an average of $100 per test by reviewing AI-first product experiences and sharing your feedback.

    Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

      This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and