My experience talking to people who confidently say current AI models are useless for their job or research is that if I sit down with them and spend 30 to 60 minutes vibe coding with them with a frontier model they change their mind 180 degrees": "Holy S***it this is more progress in a single sitting than I've made in months". I don't mean random people, but university professors and people in industry at a high-level. I realize this might not sound very credible: "Andrés, do you really have the occasion to do this?" Haha, yeah, I do. Of course my disarming friendliness is OP in this case, as I don't think your typical AI cheerleader would get the chance to do this. But the friendliness is not the takeway - that's just the way on. The main takeaway is that most often confident claims about the lack of usability of the tech is more a reflection of ego/insecurity around the topic than real object-level commentary on the tools. E.g. A university professor I sat down with recently was confident AI was useless on the basis that the automatic Gemini answers when you Google something were sometimes incorrect. They somehow (?) thought this was a reflection of what AI could do? It had never occurred to them to upload their dozens of published papers and asking the AI to recreate the statistical analysis pipeline from scratch and create the visualizations they always wanted to make but didn't know enough R to code them up themselves. You can bet a large % of commentary on AI capabilities being overblown is exactly this.