AMP Ltd (ASX: AMP) shares are one of the most interesting investments on the ASX. This storied Australian company has a long and controversial history, making the journey from respected blue chip stock to penny stock (and arguably laughing stock), to middling ASX share.
When it first joined the ASX boards in 1997, AMP quickly established itself as a robust dividend payer. But years of scandals and mismanagement in the 2010s saw AMP shares reduced to a rump of what they once were.
To give you an idea of how much this company fell to earth, consider this. In June 2001, AMP was trading at more than $14.50 a share. But late last year, those same shares hit an all-time low of just 86 cents.
Since that low, AMP shares have recovered a little. At the time of writing, they are going for $1.11 each, up almost 30% from that record low.
At the current share price, AMP is trading on a seemingly solid dividend yield of 4.05%. That yield comes from the company’s last two dividend payments: the interim dividend of 2.5 cents per share, paid out last September, and the final dividend of 2 cents per share, which we saw in April.
That final dividend might have come as something of a disappointment, seeing as 2023’s final dividend was worth 2.5 cents per share. But investors have arguably been lucky to get any income at all, considering AMP shares paid out no dividends whatsoever between March 2019 and April 2023.
Even so, longer-term investors might be thinking wistfully of the past. To illustrate why, remember that in 2018, AMP shares forked out a total of 24.5 cents per share in dividend income.
Do the dividends from AMP shares come with full franking credits?
But let’s get down to the crux of today’s article: do AMP shares come fully franked?
Well, in a word, no. AMP has never consistently paid out fully franked dividends, even back in the its heyday.
Some of its past dividends have been partially franked up to 90%, but we haven’t seen a fully franked AMP dividend for at least two decades.
Over the past year, AMP investors haven’t enjoyed much in the way of franking credits from their dividends. Both the September interim dividend and the April final dividend that AMP paid out over the past 12 months came partially franked at 20%.
Given this company’s franking history, I wouldn’t be holding my breath for a franked dividend anytime soon, either. At least AMP investors still have a decent 4.05% yield to enjoy today. Not to mention the company’s significant share buybacks that investors have been benefitting from in recent months.
Should you invest $1,000 in Amp Limited right now?
Before you buy Amp Limited shares, consider this:
Motley Fool investing expert Scott Phillips just revealed what he believes are the 5 best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Amp Limited wasn’t one of them.
The online investing service heâs run for over a decade, Motley Fool Share Advisor, has provided thousands of paying members with stock picks that have doubled, tripled or even more.*
And right now, Scott thinks there are 5 stocks that may be better buys…
Motley Fool contributor Sebastian Bowen has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.
Perpetual Ltd (ASX: PPT) shares could be a bit of a bargain buy right now.
That’s the view of analysts at Bell Potter, which feel that the ASX 200 fund manager stock is being undervalued by the market.
What is the broker saying about this ASX 200 stock?
Bell Potter notes that the company recently announced the sale of its Corporate Trust (CT) and Wealth management (WM) businesses to KKR for $2.175 billion.
It was pleased with the price, highlighting that it was ahead of its expectations of $1.5 billion to $1.9 billion.
The broker assumes a tax liability of $100 million to $400 million and expects the sale to result in a cash payment to shareholders of between $804 million to $1,104 million or $6.95 to $9.55 per share.
Adjusting for the above, the broker believes this leaves the ASX 200 stock trading at a level that makes it undervalued compared to peers. It explains:
Deducting the range of cash payments above, from the current market cap, we estimate the asset management business is being valued at between $1.3-1.6bn including cash and balance sheet assets (seed capital and holdings). Adjusting for these, implies the residual asset management business is being valued at between 3.5x-5.5x EBITDA. We believe this is too low for an international asset manager. Valuing the residual asset management business on 6.3x FY25 would imply a value of $2.1bn or $18.17/per share.
‘Considerable upside’
In light of the above, the broker has reaffirmed its buy rating and $27.60 price target on the ASX 200 stock. Based on its current share price of $21.27, this implies potential upside of 30% for investors over the next 12 months.
In addition, the broker is forecasting dividend yields of 6.4% in FY 2024 and then 7.7% in FY 2025.
Commenting on its valuation, the broker said:
As we draw closer to the demerger, the outcome for shareholders will depend upon the level of tax and deal costs associated with the sale, and current trading. Our unchanged price target of $27.60/sh is at the top of this range of outcomes ($18.17 for AM plus a cash distribution up to $9.55), as we are comfortable with the lower tax estimation, although we have increased our estimate of deal costs (to $200m from $100m). We continue to see considerable upside from the current share price. We have not changed our forecasts in this note, although as the demerger proceeds, we expect to adjust our forecasts for profitability, debt costs and dividends.
Should you invest $1,000 in Perpetual Limited right now?
Before you buy Perpetual Limited shares, consider this:
Motley Fool investing expert Scott Phillips just revealed what he believes are the 5 best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Perpetual Limited wasn’t one of them.
The online investing service heâs run for over a decade, Motley Fool Share Advisor, has provided thousands of paying members with stock picks that have doubled, tripled or even more.*
And right now, Scott thinks there are 5 stocks that may be better buys…
Motley Fool contributor James Mickleboro has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.
Innovation is one of the buzzwords of the international business world and stock markets these days.
Low productivity growth is a significant and persistent challenge across many Western nations.
Innovation is seen as essential to turning this around. Technological advancements like artificial intelligence (AI) are among many innovation measures that companies are exploring today.
Innovation means developing new products and services that deliver new revenue. It also means developing new business methods that increase efficiency and thereby raise productivity.
At the recent ASX Investor Day, Betashares investment strategist Tom Wickenden discussed the importance of innovation in powering shareholders’ returns.
He also provided some tips for investors on how to spot an innovation stock in their research.
Which are the best innovation stocks of our era?
Wickenden points out that seven of the nine listed companies that ever reached a trillion-dollar market capitalisation are United States stocks that achieved this feat through major innovation.
For example, six of the Mag Seven are US tech shares. The outlier is Tesla, a consumer cyclical stock.
Tesla is certainly an innovation leader among car manufacturers. It’s now the second-biggest electric vehicle manufacturer in the world.
Other companies in other sectors are also innovation leaders.
In the healthcare sector, consider the companies producing GLP-1 medicines. Their innovation has led to new medicines with incredible efficacy in treating the worldwide epidemic disease of obesity.
Consider the energy companies pioneering renewables in the era of decarbonisation. And so on.
How do you identify an innovation stock?
Wickenden says innovation requires a serious commitment to research and development (R&D).
So, examining a company’s R&D spending is a good place to start in identifying an innovation stock.
Take a look at the amount of money spent on R&D, the percentage of profits reinvested, and whether R&D investment is rising.
He emphasises that a large R&D spend doesn’t guarantee success, so investors need to conduct further research once they’ve identified stocks that are investing in innovation.
Investors need to find out what products, services or business practices have improved due to R&D, and whether this has translated into revenue growth that is likely to be ongoing.
Wickenden said the NASDAQ 100 is “home to some of the most innovative companies in the world and also some of the biggest R&D spenders in the world”.
Wickenden stated:
We can see ⦠over the past 10 years huge growth of research and development spending has coincided with huge growth of revenue and ultimately earnings growth for that index compared to other companies globally and especially compared to the Australian market.
Innovation often requires companies to “cannibalise” their own market share, Wickenden explains. This means developing products and services that make a company’s existing ones irrelevant.
If they fail to do so, they are likely to “succumb to new players in the market” as technology advances.
Case study: Microsoft
Ten years ago, Microsoft was a leader in locally stored enterprise software.
However, it chose to invest tens of billions in cloud computing — which would eventually make locally stored software redundant — and this has delivered exceptional revenue growth.
Between 2011 and 2014, Microsoft was the second-biggest R&D spender in the world behind Samsung Electronics Co Ltd (LSE: BC94).
Wickenden said:
Interestingly, in 2011 … they spent 90% of their research and development expenses on a cloud computing division. And … that cloud computing division is driving their growth in terms of revenue and earnings and, ultimately, their share price growth.
Today, Microsoft’s cloud computing division alone delivers more revenue than Australia’s Big Four ASX 200 bank shares combined.
The banks’ combined revenue has been nearly stagnant at about $80 billion over many years.
This is partly because the scope for innovation in a mature sector like banking is far lower than in the information technology sector.
Meantime, revenue from Microsoft’s cloud computing division has skyrocketed. Its leapt from nearly AU$30 billion in 2015 to more than AU$120 billion in 2023, Wickenden said.
Since January 2015, the Microsoft share price has risen by about 850% to US$$447.67 today.
But if doing all this research is too much trouble, Wickenden says the exchange-traded fund (ETF)Betashares Nasdaq 100 ETF (ASX: NDQ) provides a simple way to invest in many innovation stocks.
Over the past five years, the NDQ ETF share price has risen 135%, while the ASX 200 has risen 18.5%.
Should you invest $1,000 in Betashares Nasdaq 100 Etf right now?
Before you buy Betashares Nasdaq 100 Etf shares, consider this:
Motley Fool investing expert Scott Phillips just revealed what he believes are the 5 best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Betashares Nasdaq 100 Etf wasn’t one of them.
The online investing service heâs run for over a decade, Motley Fool Share Advisor, has provided thousands of paying members with stock picks that have doubled, tripled or even more.*
And right now, Scott thinks there are 5 stocks that may be better buys…
Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool’s board of directors. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Foolâs board of directors. John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Foolâs board of directors. Motley Fool contributor Bronwyn Allen has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has positions in and has recommended Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, BetaShares Nasdaq 100 ETF, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has recommended the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool Australia has positions in and has recommended BetaShares Nasdaq 100 ETF. The Motley Fool Australia has recommended Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.
Jeff Bezos' rocket company, Blue Origin, recently filed concerns to the FAA about Elon Musk's SpaceX, requesting that Starship's launch operations be potentially limited over environmental impact concerns.
The filing focused on the FAA's intentions to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of issuing SpaceX a commercial launch license for its Starship-Super Heavy mega-rocket.
The SpaceX launch system is a work in progress. Consisting of the Starship spacecraft and the Super Heavy booster and standing taller than the Statue of Liberty, the system has only flown four times, with just two of those attempts making it to space.
Yet these few launches have already indicated some environmental impacts — once creating the heat and pressure equivalent of a volcanic eruption, according to a physicist, and another time raining soil and sand down on a nearby town.
A screengrab from SpaceX's livestream of a test launch shows Starship sitting atop its Super Heavy booster on the launchpad.
SpaceX via X
According to the filing, the Super Heavy booster can contain up to an "unprecedented" 5,200 metric tons of liquid methane for its propulsion — which Blue Origin said may result in"qualified distancesfor safety margins that potentially overlap the operational sites of other companies, the government, and the public."
Citing concern over Starship having a "greater environmental impact than any other launch system" at Kennedy Space Center, Blue Origin asked the FAA to consider capping the rate of the Super Heavy "launch, landing, and other operations […] to a number that has minimal impact on the local environment." The filing did not specify what that number should be.
Blue Origin wrote in the filing that it's concerned because it also conducts operations nearby: the company occupies a large manufacturing site at Kennedy Space Center, where SpaceX's leased Launch Complex 39A for its Starship operations is located. It also employs multiple properties "all within the vicinity " of SpaceX's proposed Super Heavy booster launches, Blue Origin said.
Blue Origin's filing highlighted the potential risks to the safety of personnel and assets on nearby sites, such as explosions, debris, blast and sonic boom overpressure, and air toxins.
SpaceX plans to launch 44 Starship-Super Heavy missions per year under a NASA lease, Blue Origin wrote in the filing.
Indeed, SpaceX has earned a reputation for regular launches. The company accounted for nearly half of the world's orbital launches last year. It launched its Falcon 9 rocket 91 times in 2023, breaking its previous record by 30 launches, CNBC reported.
In addition to capping the number of launches, Blue Origin suggested other mitigations, including adding more infrastructure to reduce the risk to other nearby launch providers and requiring SpaceX to compensate for any losses caused by their operations.
Musk responded to the complaint on X by writing "Sue Origin," adding another swipe at Bezos to their 15 years of public feuding.
The Tesla CEO later added, "An obviously disingenuous response. Not cool of them to try (for the third time) to impede SpaceX's progress by lawfare."
Neither SpaceX nor Blue Origin immediately responded to Business Insider's requests for comments ahead of publication.
After being asked to decipher Musk's initial message, xAI chatbot Grok wrote that his post "appears to be a tongue-in-cheek comment" about Blue Origin's "history of resorting to legal action rather than competing fairly in the marketplace."
The Tesla CEO simply replied with a bull's-eye emoji.
Bell Potter thinks that Transurban could be one of the best Australian dividend shares to buy. It manages and develops urban toll road networks in Australia and the United States.
The broker likes the company due to its positive exposure to inflation and low risk cashflows. It said:
We believe the current inflationary environment is favourable for Transurban given its inflation-linked revenue stream with annual escalators. Moreover, TCL provides low risk cash flows over the long term, with long concession duration (30+ years), and relative traffic/income resilience. The group’s current pipeline of growth projects is $3.3 billion (TCL’s share of total project cost) and further huge development opportunities are expected over the next few decades, supported by population and economic growth.
Bell Potter is forecasting dividends per share of 63.6 cents in FY 2024 and then 65.1 cents in FY 2025. Based on the current Transurban share price of $12.81, this will mean dividend yields of 5% and 5.1%, respectively.
The broker has a buy rating and $15.50 price target on its shares.
Morgans thinks that Woodside Energy could be a top income share to buy right now. It is one of the world’s largest energy producers with high-quality operations across the globe.
The broker likes the company due to its “high-quality earnings” and attractive valuation. It said:
A tier 1 upstream oil and gas operator with high-quality earnings that we see as likely to continue pursuing an opportunistic acquisition strategy. WDS’s share price has been under pressure in recent months from a combination of oil price volatility and approval issues at Scarborough, its key offshore growth project. With both of those factors now having moderated, with the pullback in oil prices moderating and work at Scarborough back underway, we see now as a good time to add to positions. Increasing our conviction in our call is the progress WDS is making through the current capex phase, while maintaining a healthy balance sheet and healthy dividend profile. WDS still has to address long-term issues in its fundamentals (such as declining production from key projects NWS/Pluto), but will still generate substantial high-quality earnings for years to come.
In respect to dividends, Morgans is forecasting Woodside to pay fully franked dividends of $1.25 per share in FY 2024 and then $1.57 per share in FY 2025. Based on its current share price of $27.96, this represents dividend yields of 4.5% and 5.6%, respectively.
The broker has an add rating and $36.00 price target on its shares.
Should you invest $1,000 in Transurban Group right now?
Before you buy Transurban Group shares, consider this:
Motley Fool investing expert Scott Phillips just revealed what he believes are the 5 best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Transurban Group wasn’t one of them.
The online investing service heâs run for over a decade, Motley Fool Share Advisor, has provided thousands of paying members with stock picks that have doubled, tripled or even more.*
And right now, Scott thinks there are 5 stocks that may be better buys…
Motley Fool contributor James Mickleboro has positions in Woodside Energy Group. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has positions in and has recommended Transurban Group. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.
There are a lot of options for investors in the mining sector. But one of the best right now could be Bellevue Gold Ltd (ASX: BGL).
That’s the view of analysts at Goldman Sachs, which have just initiated coverage on the gold miner’s shares.
What is the broker saying about this ASX 200 mining stock?
According to the note, Goldman believes that Bellevue Gold’s shares are undervalued at current levels based on its long term gold price assumptions.
The broker also highlights its compelling expansion potential and significant mine optionality. It said:
Compelling expansion potential, where BGL has proven capability to grow processing capacity 20% to 1.2Mtpa (no further capital expected), where we factor in a ramp-up to a ~1.2Mtpa run rate by the end of FY25. A study is in progress for expansion to 1.5Mtpa (expected 1HFY25), where existing oversized equipment (crusher/proposed paste plant) helps mitigate capex requirements, supporting increased gold production of ~250koz (ramp up through FY27E), with a highly compelling IRR under various gold price scenarios.
In respect to its mine optionality, Goldman adds:
Significant mine optionality from investment to-date de-risks ore access/exploration, where recent drilling highlighted assays with significantly higher grades than current resources (from already above peer gold grades), and potential for additional high-grade shoots. On our estimates, a prolonged mine life from resource extension could add ~A$430mn/~20% to our NAV from a 5-year mine extension (excluding the 1.5Mtpa mill expansion), with further upside if LT prices are closer to spot.
Goldman tips big returns
The note reveals that the broker has initiated coverage on the ASX 200 mining stock with a buy rating and $2.20 price target.
Based on its current share price of $1.77, this implies potential upside of 24% for investors over the next 12 months.
And while no dividends are expected in the near term, Goldman sees potential for capital returns in the future. This is based on its strong free cash flow (FCF) yields. It concludes:
Relative to peers, BGL remains undervalued in our view, trading at ~1x NAV or pricing in our LT gold price of US$1,800/oz (peer average ~1.1x NAV and ~US$1,900/oz), and near-term FCF yields of c. 10% in FY25/26 remain attractive vs. peers and support upside to the outlook for possible future capital returns (despite ~25% of medium-term gold sales being hedged at ~A$2,700-2,900/oz).
All in all, this could make Bellevue Gold one to consider if you’re looking for mining sector exposure.
Should you invest $1,000 in Bellevue Gold Limited right now?
Before you buy Bellevue Gold Limited shares, consider this:
Motley Fool investing expert Scott Phillips just revealed what he believes are the 5 best stocks for investors to buy right now… and Bellevue Gold Limited wasn’t one of them.
The online investing service heâs run for over a decade, Motley Fool Share Advisor, has provided thousands of paying members with stock picks that have doubled, tripled or even more.*
And right now, Scott thinks there are 5 stocks that may be better buys…
Motley Fool contributor James Mickleboro has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has positions in and has recommended Goldman Sachs Group. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.
OpenAI CTO Mira Murati weighed in on AI-driven job loss, saying AI will eliminate some creative jobs — but those jobs "shouldn't have been there in the first place."
PATRICK T. FALLON via Getty Images
OpenAI CTO Mira Murati weighed in on the topic of AI-driven job loss.
AI will eliminate some creative jobs, "but maybe they shouldn't have been there in the first place," she said.
Writer Ed Zitron called Murati's remarks "a declaration of war against creative labor."
OpenAI's CTO Mira Murati weighed in on AI-driven job loss this month, suggesting that some workers — especially creatives — replaced by AI had jobs that "shouldn't have been there in the first place."
In doing so, she not only outraged people at risk of losing their livelihoods due to technological advancements but also seemed to reveal that she doesn't even know what AI is good for.
During an event at Dartmouth on June 8, Murati, speaking to university trustee Jeffrey Blackburn, discussed the AI behind ChatGPTand DALL-E, as well as safety and ethical considerations as the technology progresses.
When the conversation turned to how AI can disrupt the process for artists, Murati said she believes the tech will soon be primarily used as a collaborative tool to help more people become creative.
"Some creative jobs maybe will go away," Murati said, "but maybe they shouldn't have been there in the first place — you know, if the content that comes out of it is not very high quality."
Notably, Murati raised the topic of AI-driven job loss on her own, suggesting that the very workers whose creations helped train AI into what it is today have jobs that shouldn't even exist now that it's here.
Ed Zitron, writer and CEO of EZPR, a national tech and business public relations agency, told Business Insider that Murati's perspective results from management's distance from the people who actually build things.
"The people losing their jobs to AI so far have been contract workers that helped fill gaps at organizations — necessarily so — that are now going to be filled with deeply mediocre slop, ordered by people who don't understand the businesses they're in, to fulfill a need that they neither care about nor appreciate, a kind of slow-moving poison that will weaken the edges of companies," Zitron said.
Zitron added he's tired of people "who don't build or write or draw or paint or sing or do anything creative making statements about what the creative arts should be, or how they should be run."
"These people treat creativity like a problem to be solved," he continued.
When Business Insider reached representatives for OpenAI, they declined to comment, instead pointing to a June 22 post on X by Murati expanding on her thoughts.
How artists are actually approaching AI
Boris Eldagsen is a photographer and visual artist who embraces AI. Last year, as part of an effort to demonstrate how impossible it is to tell the difference between "real" and AI-generated artwork, he entered — and won — the World Photography Organization's Sony World Photography Awards with a picture created with help from OpenAI's DALL-E2. He ultimately declined the award.
Where in the past he was "a solo instrument" working to create new work, Eldagsen told BI that he now collaborates with AI technology, considering himself more of a conductor while the training data serves as a "gigantic, anonymous choir," making his job to "bring that into some kind of harmony and make sense out of it."
That said, he still doesn't agree with Murati.
Boris Eldagsen shows a printed photograph of his work "Pseudomnesia: The Electrician," which he created using AI and won the "Sony World Photography Award."
FABRIZIO BENSCH via Reuters
"I think it's a pity, and I can't feel any empathy here. For me, her comments are a mix between being naive and arrogant," Eldagsen told BI. "I think she didn't really think it through, or she can't put herself in the position of those people who are afraid of losing their jobs."
To say those jobs that could be eliminated by AI shouldn't exist in the first place, Eldagsen said, "is just nonsense," and to suggest poor quality is at the core of why those jobs might be lost shows Murati doesn't have much of a grasp on how and why people create or consume things.
"The majority of things that we produce are not high quality. We have fast food, we have trash TV, we have bad products that you can use one time, and then you throw them away," Eldagsen said. "All these things shouldn't be there in the first place, but all these things are work that some people have to do. They pay the rent, they enable a living — and why should you just be so arrogant and say it shouldn't exist? This is something that I just don't understand."
Miles Astray, an artist, photographer, and writer, told Business Insider that Murati's comments come across as "condescending."
Like Eldagsen, Astray made AI the focal point of one of his art pieces this month: He turned Eldagsen's stunt on its head and took 3rd place in an AI art contest with a real-life photo he'd shot of a flamingo.
Miles Astray won third place in the "AI generated" category of the 1839 Awards.
Miles Astray
Astray said he doesn't buy the narrative of creativity being boosted by AI. The technology has the ability to free up time, make some repetitive work tasks more efficient, and give artists more space to ideate on the things that actually make them creative, he said, but asking a computer to do the creative work itself cheapens the process and ultimately produces an end result that's a regurgitated copy of the data the AI was trained on, not anexampleof a human's creative expression.
"You need to sit down with your piece of paper and your paintbrush and start painting — that is how you hone your skill," Astray said. "I think who it will really boost is companies, who will use it as a tool to increase productivity and to cut corners."
In the end, Astray said he sees the tension between tech and creativity as less about making the creative process easier and more about companies leveraging technology to outsource jobs to the point where they no longer need to employ a creative workforce.
"I think we need to have an honest public debate about the advantages, but also the pitfalls and dangers of AI technology," Astray said. "But that's not what she was doing."
'Mediocre is all they want'
"AI tools could lower the barriers and allow anyone with an idea to create," Murati wrote in her June 22 post on X. "At the same time, we must be honest and acknowledge that AI will automate certain tasks. Just like spreadsheets changed things for accountants and bookkeepers, AI tools can do things like writing online ads or making generic images and templates."
She added that a key part of the conversation around AI-driven job loss, especially among creative professions, is to "recognize the difference between temporary creative tasks and the kind that add lasting meaning and value to society."
"With AI tools taking on more repetitive or mechanistic aspects of the creative process, like generating SEO metadata, we can free up human creators to focus on higher-level creative thinking and choices," Murati wrote. "This lets artists stay in control of their vision and focus their energy on the most important parts of their work."
But not everyone is convinced.
"Throughout the last two years of AI hype, OpenAI and their ilk have been exceedingly careful not to directly attack labor," Zitron told BI. "What Murati is saying here — that some creative jobs 'shouldn't have existed in the first place' — is an outright declaration of war against creative labor, clearly stating that OpenAI believes that not only are there parts of creativity that are 'inefficient,' but that OpenAI will be part of the process of 'fixing' them."
Zitron said he believes that AI is approaching the top of the S-curve, with limited progress left to be achieved, and that Murati, Sam Altman, and the rest of OpenAI are "desperate to suggest that we're just about to have AGI or some sort of magnificent machine that can do the job of a hundred thousand people."
Such a suggestion keeps the money flowing as companies clamor for the latest version of a promising new technology that proponents swear will make their workplace faster, more efficient, and cheaper to run — all the buzzwords needed to keep investors interested, even if it means they're churning out a subpar product.
"The output from AI is mediocre, barely rising to the quality that the task requires," Zitron said. "But the people in charge are so often removed from the process that mediocre is all they want, even if it ends up making the rest of the project worse."
