3 ms·
I think what's interesting about this is that the one on the right looks ridiculous and complicated. At some point a human being has to know how to use it, and
by staticassertion 9y ago
I think what's interesting about this is that the one on the right looks ridiculous and complicated. At some point a human being has to know how to use it, and rather than a trivial interface, it's a complex one.
Many would likely still reach for the far left. A human would have to make a call saying "Wow, this is not a compromise we can make, other humans are not going to use this".
That said, it's a moot point - I am in full agreement that the two revolutions are different.
- kbenson 9y ago> At some point a human being has to know how to use it You might find the first two comments interesting: @russell usability of the node on the far right is a nightmare. Where do the humans attach the cables? No empathy in AI design. What makes you think humans will have to attach the cables?
- ThomPete 9y agoThats not really a good argument as if humans was intended to install it also here you could have machines to make sure it got properly connected just like we have for sillicon chips. The argument actually speaks against what he was trying to say. He is basically saying that humans aren't clever enough to utilize optimal solutions which is a weakness not a strength.
- majewsky 9y ago> He is basically saying that humans aren't clever enough to utilize optimal solutions Your phrasing is too harsh since "optimal" is not defined thoroughly.
- ThomPete 9y agoAny solution that uses less material and is just as strong is considered optimal in my book. It is indeed defined as the blurp also says. I am trying to find the original paper again.