3 ms·
Sure, I don't disagree that automating tedium (I'd say self discovery isn't tedium, but not quibble) is the purpose of the machine. However, what I take issue
by Avicebron 5y ago
Sure, I don't disagree that automating tedium (I'd say self discovery isn't tedium, but not quibble) is the purpose of the machine.
However, what I take issue is with "intelligently identify multiple ways to identify "the thing"" sure, in you're example if someone wants to get to the top search result for "the history of mesopotamia" it might be doing alright...but, who is the one who decided what that search result is, if I type in "history of mesopotamia" and I get shunted directly to the wikipedia entry, maybe that's all ever get, I won't see the thing I really might have wanted which was a specific book about stone tablets of mesopotamia.
The point is, offloading our intelligence to "the machine" only makes as smart or as agenda driven as the machine and its maker, this overall must have some limiting effect. even if doing more with less capacity is good, if the capacity itself is limited to the machine, then it's like saying, I can eat more pie, but the pie is also shrinking.