I agree. Humans are interactive agents, they have broader knowledge about the world, and they can (to a degree) diagnose their performance and compensate. Thi

I agree. Humans are interactive agents, they have broader knowledge about the world, and they can (to a degree) diagnose their performance and compensate. Think of a DL powered, visually guided robot vs. a human on a production line. One task might be to do QC inspection at the end of the line. Suppose something gets on the camera lens. In general, the DL system will keep chugging along and the accuracy will degrade. The human will notice this and clean his glasses. If he sees something ambiguous as it passes on the line, he might give it a bit more attention or adjust the angle he's looking at it from. If he sees a series of the same anomalies, he will notice a pattern. Perhaps one of the machines up the line from him has started to introduce a new type of defect. Suppose in assembly a worker has a sore muscle. He might adapt his motions to compensate, slow down, go to the doctor, take some pain pills, or take a day off. Unless programmed or trained to detect this, a robot will keep driving its failing motor harder until it breaks.