| ▲ | block_dagger 20 hours ago | |
Not necessarily. Consider a human assistant who performs repetitive tasks at an acceptable cost and accuracy while dealing with edge cases often autonomously. | ||
| ▲ | flextheruler 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |
I'd like to apply for this job where I can make mistakes and it's considered an acceptable cost. Seriously, I can't remember the last time I made a significant error and it was acceptable. Maybe during training? Half the effort in any job is literally verifying correctness. | ||
| ▲ | rafaelmn 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
If we want reliability - we come up with processes to make it reliable and not rely on individuals getting it right. Code is a way to create a reliable process in the digital world. | ||
| ▲ | recursive 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
For some things that's acceptable or even good. If I want to add up a list of a million numbers human assistants aren't bringing any advantages though. | ||
| ▲ | saxenaabhi 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Maybe acceptable in some cases but the original example in this thread was about accounting and they use software to do the counting not humans. And even id humans/llms do it there would still be a need for systems of record with things like audit log etc. | ||