5 ms·
Interesting that the author didn't mention Intelligence Augmentation/amplification[1] in the article. IA is often contrasted to AI that it makes humans more abl
by arthurjj 8y ago
Interesting that the author didn't mention Intelligence Augmentation/amplification[1] in the article. IA is often contrasted to AI that it makes humans more able to do their job.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_amplification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_amplification
- goatlover 8y agoIt's interesting how AI gets so much hype and the potential dangers and benefits are discussed so much. But the reality of tech so far has been IA. We make tools to enhance our abilities, not tools that exist for their own purposes.
- ozim 8y agoIA is not sexy, you cannot get huge funding for improving existing workers. That is what computers should do anyway (and not succeded bc peple visit FB, hackernews at work) . But AI promises you don't need employees and that is something owners would invest. Reality doesn't matter, they want full automation promise, what they get is another topic.
- mirimir 8y ago> But AI promises you don't need employees and that is something owners would invest. Also no owners. Or at least, no management.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago> Also no owners. Or at least, no management. Managers are just another employees from the POV of the owners. What the owners hope for is AI eliminating workers, and strong IP laws ensuring they still get to be the owners and rake in all the profits.
- empath75 8y agoI think that’s the Apple/Microsoft philosophy.
- arthurjj 8y agoAgreed. I more meant I was surprised that the term intelligent augmentation wasn't used explicitly.
- TeMPOraL 8y agoI don't think so. IMO, Apple and Microsoft are just less aggressive in taking all the agency away from their users. They do that too, but they don't put as much focus on it as Google does.