| ▲ | TheOtherHobbes 17 hours ago | |
Underappreciated point. The point of inflection is where humans switch from being a driver to a liability. But I don't think it's randomness, because that would be easy to add. It's more like a different perspective on the training data, a different set of perception categories, and a different set of skills used to work with all of the above. Those skills aren't very efficient, but they're the best we can do. We're used to their strengths but we don't like to think about their limitations. It's completely plausible that AI will replace some of them, and not implausible it could replace and improve on all of them. | ||
| ▲ | basch 17 hours ago | parent [-] | |
It's also not necessarily implausible that AI/we decide that performance is better with humans in the loop somewhere, even if its reduced to something like mechanical turk. | ||