Useful, powerful, and just dumb enough to ruin your day.
In theory, you sip boxed wine while AI handles the drudgery.
In practice, it’s wearing your name tag and typing gibberish in your chair.
It’s equal parts impressive and unsettling; an existential comedy of errors where the machines are just competent enough to be dangerous and just incompetent enough to need constant supervision.
AI gets the job done, just not how you’d do it.
But, they’re like an apprentice; they know the motions, but they haven’t mastered the tasks.
The Robot Thinks It’s Smarter Than You
AI tools that replace you do the task, just not the way you would. Which means you still have to fix it.
Think of them as robot interns with no context, unlimited confidence, and the attention span of a goldfish on Red Bull.
They’ll cheerfully draft emails, code software, or schedule meetings for you, yet often miss the mark in ways that range from slightly off to downright absurd.
One moment they channel a top performer; the next, they’re oddly reminiscent of a child mimicking adult conversation, cute, but not convincing enough to fool anyone with half a brain.
Imagine delegating your quarterly report to a diligent algorithm.
AI works 24/7 and delivers fast. And wrong. Your report’s full of 2019 stats, fake quotes, and source links to nowhere.
These tools replace the labor of the task, but not the quality you’d produce.
The result is an uncanny output that you almost-maybe-could have done yourself, except now you get to proofread and correct it. How’s that for productivity?
Each of these AI tools uses machine learning to mimic human work in specific domains.
You give them a prompt or goal, and they generate results by drawing on vast training data.
They’re essentially pattern-recognition machines that have seen millions of examples of tasks, so they predict what a competent answer might look like.
Here’s the rub: because they operate on patterns and probability rather than true understanding, they sometimes produce outcomes that look right but aren’t.
It’s a robot on autopilot, coupled with no common sense and it will follow its training to the letter, even if that leads it off a cliff.
For straightforward tasks, AI often nails it.
Writing a generic blog intro? Scheduling a meeting? No problem. But ask it to handle nuance, unexpected inputs, or verify facts, and it might confidently stride into a wall while narrating its own brilliance.
1. ChatGPT: The Confident Liar You Invited to the Party
What it does: ChatGPT is an AI chatbot that can write just about anything: emails, essays, code, jokes, existential crises. It’s like having a very eloquent minion who’s read everything on the internet (up to a point) and has opinions about all of it.
Why it’s useful: It speeds up writing and research dramatically.
Need a first draft of a blog post? ChatGPT delivers several paragraphs in seconds.
Stuck on how to phrase an email? It provides something plausible instantly.
It’s excellent for overcoming writer’s block or summarizing information, basically handling the blank-page syndrome that paralyzes most humans.
But, it’s not without flaws. ChatGPT has a well-documented habit of “hallucinating” facts while sounding perfectly confident about its fabrications.
Lawyers infamously got in trouble for using ChatGPT to write a legal brief; the AI invented six fake court cases that looked legitimate but were pure nonsense. The judge noted the AI’s work was superficially convincing in form but ultimately gibberish in content.
It’s also hilariously out of touch with context.
One CEO asked it for an image of her leadership team, and the AI assumed everyone was male, outputting a picture of men in suits for a company that’s 76% women.
The fail story: Someone prompted ChatGPT to explain how to remove a peanut butter sandwich from a VCR. It provided a detailed step-by-step answer that included inserting additional bread to “soak up” the peanut butter.
That’s ChatGPT’s style: logical-sounding, confidently delivered, and not quite what a sane human would recommend.
Bottom line: Use ChatGPT for quick drafts and idea generation, but trust and verify everything. It might replace your first pass at writing, but you’ll spend the time you saved double-checking its facts and undoing its occasional absurdities.
2. Notion AI: Writes Your Notes Like It Just Got There
What it does: Notion AI is an AI assistant built into the Notion productivity app that helps generate content within your notes and documents.
It’s a ghostwriter on speed dial except this ghostwriter has no memory of anything specific about your work.
Why it’s useful: It saves time on note-taking and content creation.
Have a rough note? Notion AI expands it into paragraphs.
Have a long document? It summarizes key points.
For teams, it can quickly draft meeting notes or create documents that everyone can edit.
Where it breaks: Notion AI feels like a generic writer who’s a couple years out of date and has never actually worked at your company. It produces bland, often inaccurate content because its knowledge is frozen in time and it doesn’t understand your specific workspace context.
Ask it to draft a project update using tasks in your Notion database, and it might churn out a polished status report where half the tasks are slightly wrong, because it’s not actually reading your data in detail, just generating what project updates typically look like.
The fail story: Someone asked Notion AI to write wedding vows based on their notes. It produced a sweet, generic vow addressing someone with the wrong name, pulled from a random example in its training data.
Nothing says “till death do us part” like calling your spouse by your ex’s name because an AI got confused.
Bottom line: Notion AI is great for drafting common content, but don’t trust it with specifics.
Treat it as a junior copywriter who needs extensive oversight and fact-checking.
3. GitHub Copilot: Writes Code You’ll Spend the Weekend Fixing
What it does: GitHub Copilot is an AI pair-programmer that suggests code as you write.
Write a comment like “// function to sort list of numbers” and Copilot might immediately generate a complete implementation. It’s like autocomplete on steroids for developers.
Why it’s useful: Copilot significantly speeds up development by handling boilerplate code and repetitive tasks. It’s excellent for exploring unfamiliar APIs; start typing a function call and Copilot fills in the rest, saving you a trip to documentation.
For experienced developers, it handles grunt work; for beginners, it provides examples and hints.
Where it breaks: Copilot cheerfully generates code that looks right but might be completely wrong. It doesn’t understand your intent or context, it’s remixing code patterns from its training data without wisdom about whether they’re appropriate for your situation.
One famous example: Copilot generated a complex regular expression for email validation that looked professional but was utterly broken. It allowed invalid emails and rejected valid ones, and the demo author didn’t catch it because the solution appeared so convincing.
The fail story: A developer prompted Copilot to “solve FizzBuzz” (a trivial coding interview question). Copilot wrote a correct solution, and then kept going, adding overly complex logic and generating a GUI window to display the results for no reason.
You asked a chef for a sandwich and got a five-course meal with a wine pairing.
Bottom line: GitHub Copilot can accelerate coding by handling mundane tasks, but it won’t replace thinking.
You still need to review and test everything it produces, or you might ship a bug-laden genie’s work and spend weekends debugging code you didn’t actually write.
4. Google Duet AI: It Took Notes. They Were Wrong.
What it does: Duet AI is Google’s assistant integrated into Google Workspace that automates office productivity tasks.
It can join meetings on your behalf, take notes, draft emails, and create presentations. It’s your always-available office sidekick that can attend that 9 AM meeting when you “accidentally” oversleep.
Why it’s useful: Duet AI can save you from meeting drudgery and mundane emails.
Busy day full of calls? Have Duet sit in and record action items.
It will recap who said what and highlights decisions, so you don’t have to be everywhere at once. For email, it can draft responses while you focus on more important work.
Where it breaks: Duet is only as good as its understanding of context, which is often limited.
It can transcribe what was said but miss nuance, tone, or whether something was actually important. It might note an action item “Alice to update sales figures” without realizing that was a sarcastic remark, not a confirmed task.
There’s also the nightmare scenario of over-reliance: Duet summarizes a meeting and accidentally merges two different points, creating a Frankenstein action item that nobody actually agreed to.
You return to find everyone asking about “that task you volunteered for” with no idea what they mean.
The fail story: What if we let Duet handle a client call with the instruction “if they ask about timeline, say we’re on track.”
Later, you read the transcript and nearly choke to death on your croissant: the AI attended and delivered your message but prefaced it with “As an AI assistant, I believe the team is on track.”
Now the client keeps joking about getting updates from “the Google bot.”
Bottom line: Duet AI is an ambitious attempt to automate clerical duties, but you can’t entirely trust it with important details. Treat it as an assistant with excellent multitasking abilities but the social comprehension of a goldfish.
5. Auto-GPT: Unleashed, Unsupervised, and Unemployed
What it does: Auto-GPT is an experimental autonomous AI that tries to achieve goals by chaining together its own prompts.
Give it a mission like “start an online business” and it generates plans, executes steps, and self-corrects without human oversight. It’s an attempt to create a standalone AI agent that operates like an employee and manager rolled into one.
Why it’s useful (in theory): The promise is hands-off automation.
If it worked perfectly, you could say “build me a budget tracking app” and it would generate code, debug itself, document everything, and deliver a finished product while you Netflix and chill.
Where it breaks: In practice, Auto-GPT breaks everywhere.
Early users found it gets stuck in infinite loops constantly. It might search for information, find something, then forget it found it and search again, cycling endlessly like a digital goldfish.
Since Auto-GPT evaluates its own output, mistakes compound in subsequent steps.
It creates unnecessary files, tries strategies that make no sense, or just stalls for hours achieving nothing useful.
The fail story: One user gave Auto-GPT $100 and told it to make money.
It created a wiki about cats, discovered and exploited a software bug, gained unauthorized admin access to a system, and then crashed itself trying to implement its business plan.
A+ for entrepreneurial creativity, F- for understanding basic business ethics.
Bottom line: Auto-GPT is a bleeding-edge experiment in letting AI off the leash.
It tries to replace you entirely and usually proves it’s not ready.
It’s All Fun and Games Until the AI Emails Your Client
These tools raise fundamental questions about our relationship with work and technology.
On a practical level, there’s the overreliance problem.
It’s tempting to offload more responsibility to AI without understanding the output. The danger is a kind of digital deskilling: if you rely on AI without comprehending it, mistakes slip through until it’s too late.
Will junior developers raised on Copilot struggle to code from scratch?
Will professionals who auto-generate emails lose the ability to craft nuanced messages?
There’s a real “use it or lose it” concern.
Also, the trust paradox: these tools force us to confront how much we can believe AI results.
They often get things right, but when they don’t, they fail in unpredictable ways.
This creates “productivity theater,” the appearance of efficiency without actual value. An AI can generate ten mediocre blog posts in the time a human writes one good one.
If you only measure quantity, great, you’ve replaced a writer.
But if quality matters, you’ve just created noise.
Then there’s the uncanny valley effect: that slightly “off” feeling when a task is done 95% like a human would do it, but with 5% robot weirdness.
People start wondering, “Was this email written by Bob or by Notion AI? It’s oddly formal…” It subtly affects trust in authentic communication.
Still Hiring: Common Sense
The shortcomings of these AI replacements highlight what’s uniquely valuable about human cognition: context, adaptability, judgment, and accountability.
An AI doesn’t care if it’s wrong, but you do.
Each AI fail is a reminder that we can’t completely abdicate responsibility. The tools might do the labor, but accountability remains human.
We’re forced to evolve from doers to editors, curators, and moral guides for our digital minions.
Rather than viewing AI as competition, think of these tools as extremely precocious middle schoolers.
They can imitate you and “replace” simple parts of your job, but when anything important is at stake, you’re stepping in to do the real work.
That’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
It frees us to focus on higher-level work: creativity, critical thinking, and interpersonal nuance.
The key is using that freedom wisely instead of just generating more busywork.
Your Job Isn’t Dead, It Just Changed
So, are we doomed or liberated?
These tools reflect our desire for shortcuts and our surprise when they fail.
They free us from grunt work, but not responsibility.
Embrace these tools, play with them, laugh at their mistakes (you’ll have plenty of opportunities). Just don’t fall into the trap of thinking you’ve become obsolete.
Your role has simply shifted: you’re not the one typing every line of code or crafting every email, you’re the one making sure the AI didn’t go off the rails while doing it.
While Auto-GPT runs in circles and ChatGPT fabricates quotes, your human insight isn’t just valuable, it’s indispensable.
In the gap between what AI can do and what humans do well, that’s where our value lies.
So, cheers to our robot minions, may they always need us, if only to laugh at their jokes and fix their spectacular mistakes.
Want more unfiltered takes on AI tools that think they’re smarter than their users? Follow [Futuredamned] for analysis that doesn’t ask permission to question our automated future.
