《经济学人·商论》现在订阅就送定制版《每日一词集锦》！
想要通过阅读《经济学人》来拓展视野、提高英语读写水平，具体怎么做？对于火爆全网的话题，如何写出新意？比如，近日火爆的ChatGPT对职业与个人的冲击，《经济学人》的职场专栏会如何解读？一起来试听商论学习社区官方【译者课堂】137课解读的这篇巴托比专栏原文Machine learnings：How do employees and customers feel about artificial intelligence?的开头部分 ↓- Machine learning变作复数作为标题，是怎样的手法？
- 欲扬先抑的手法：跟“一本正经胡说八道”的ChatGPT聊天，有点像跟一个经济学家对话
- “Being clear about how workers would redirect time and energy that is freed up by an AI helps foster acceptance. So does creating a sense of agency: ... ”是何种结构？它如何有力提出了关键论据？
- 引用外部研究强调本文的关键：“员工认知”是迎接ChatGPT冲击的关键
- 对比研究说明，对AI的理解也可能存在过犹不及的问题——援引两方面观点令论述更加平衡
- 如何处理员工对AI系统的担忧？需要多大程度上理解GPT系统的原理？这些问题都会影响到组织管理者的判断：本文也给出了更多适合按图索骥阅读的主题方向，以及《经济学人》的观点
How do employees and customers feel about artificial intelligence?
IF YOU ASK something of ChatGPT, an artificial-intelligence (AI) tool that is all the rage, the responses you get back are almost instantaneous, utterly certain and often wrong. It is a bit like talking to an economist. The questions raised by technologies like ChatGPT yield much more tentative answers. But they are ones that managers ought to start asking.One issue is how to deal with employees’ concerns about job security. Worries are natural. An AI that makes it easier to process your expenses is one thing; an AI that people would prefer to sit next to at a dinner party quite another. Being clear about how workers would redirect time and energy that is freed up by an AI helps foster acceptance. So does creating a sense of agency: research conducted by MIT Sloan Management Review and the Boston Consulting Group found that an ability to override an AI makes employees more likely to use it.Whether people really need to understand what is going on inside an AI is less clear. Intuitively, being able to follow an algorithm’s reasoning should trump being unable to. But a piece of research by academics at Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Polytechnic University of Milan suggests that too much explanation can be a problem.Employees at Tapestry, a portfolio of luxury brands, were given access to a forecasting model that told them how to allocate stock to stores. Some used a model whose logic could be interpreted; others used a model that was more of a black box. Workers turned out to be likelier to overrule models they could understand because they were, mistakenly, sure of their own intuitions. Workers were willing to accept the decisions of a model they could not fathom, however, because of their confidence in the expertise of people who had built it. The credentials of those behind an AI matter. ... ... ...跟随这样的译者领读精读《经济学人》原文，是否让文章语言点和结构都变得十分清晰？
↓ 订阅全年商论可免费加入商论学习社区聆听完整课堂#136 ↓【译者课堂】由商论官方译者通过多个步骤解读《经济学人》原刊文章，带你从词、句、段循序渐进，掌握更高效的学习方法
什么是商论英语学习社区？怎么加入？
“英语学习社区”是商论为年度订阅用户推出独家增值服务。
官方语料权威解读：《经济学人·商论》学习社区内容全部选自《经济学人》原刊中的热读文章和真实例句，配以官方译者多个步骤的权威解读，带你从词、句、段循序渐进，掌握更高效的学习方法。
提升英文与全球视野并重：无论身处学校还是职场，我们都能通过一流的内容帮你逐步培养地道的高阶英文应用能力、全球视野和跨界思考能力，一起为充满挑战与机遇的AIGC时代做足准备。
订阅商论即可同步加入英语学习社区（一年），享受海量往期内容：
「译者课堂」每月两次更新译者领读的精读课程，目前已有130+期；原「每周英语课堂」200+期
「每日一词」每周一到五推送一个单词，至今已有1500+期
「学人习语」每周六推送一则英文习语，目前已有280+期
同时，商论年度订户也将加入【主编领读社群】获取每日《经济学人·商论》的导读推荐。
点击“阅读原文”订阅商论↓
