Nearly all Hungarians aged 16–75 have heard of artificial intelligence, yet self-assessed knowledge is limited: 40% say they feel well-informed about AI, 45% report having little knowledge, and 15% say they have virtually no concrete understanding.
Financial advice from AI: about half the population is open to it
A nationally representative survey commissioned by Generali Biztosító found that 23% of Hungarians have already asked artificial intelligence for financial advice, and a further 27% would be open to doing so in the future. In other words, roughly one in two Hungarians can imagine relying on AI when making financial decisions.
According to the survey, 7% have followed AI-provided financial advice, while another 16% have at least partly relied on such advice.
Where people use AI: from information search to workplace tasks
Among AI users, 61% employ the technology for information searches. AI is also becoming a routine aid in a growing range of areas: learning and self-education, text generation, workplace tasks, content creation, travel planning and shopping decisions.
The generational divide is clear: among 16–29 year-olds, one third use AI for learning or self-improvement, 26% for generating text, 25% for image or video creation, and 24% for workplace tasks. By contrast, in the 60–75 age group these shares are below 10% in every category, and 35% of that cohort have never used an AI tool.
Risks and opportunities: mixed public attitudes
Survey respondents are divided in their overall attitude: 25% consider AI generally risky, 21% do not perceive much danger, and the largest group—48%—see both opportunities and risks.
Generali’s earlier campaign against so‑called “AI blindness” highlighted this contradiction: a quick, confidently worded AI response is not necessarily accurate. The company stresses that using the technology requires a new kind of awareness: we must learn not only how to ask questions effectively, but also when to follow up, verify answers, or consult other sources. The press release emphasizes that the intent is not to argue against AI use, but to promote practices that combine AI assistance with human judgment and professional verification where general answers fall short.
