| ▲ | science4sail 6 hours ago | |||||||
I would argue that there's still an important role for human employees as compliance ablative armor.The human's purpose is to keep an eye on the LLM, occasionally intervene/interfere with its work, and most importantly, incur social/legal liability for anything that the LLM does wrong. Kind of like the backup drivers used by self-driving cars. | ||||||||
| ▲ | kg 6 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
Is being compliance ablative armor uplifting, fulfilling work? Is there any way in which your personal competence and effort impacts whether the AI screws up or not? Do you have any way to build job security as ablative armor? That sounds miserable. | ||||||||
| ||||||||