3 ms·
AI/LLMs cannot "do work that is worth doing" in this context because the work that is worth doing involves human learning/education, not simply the production o
by ergonaught 4y ago
AI/LLMs cannot "do work that is worth doing" in this context because the work that is worth doing involves human learning/education, not simply the production of content.
If you meant, "when can AI perform all writing tasks such that it would be a waste of time for human beings to develop the ability to express themselves in writing", well, fine question, likely answered far too soon.
- whimsicalism 4y agoIt's already clear that existing LLM have the ability to do things that were previously only accessible to people with "human learning/education." "Production of content" can probably go a lot further than you think, for a model that has internet/API access. Would love to see more warrants on the claims you are making - feel like you haven't fleshed it out enough in this comment.
- EamonnMR 4y agoWill reliance on LLMs neuter our minds the same way that reliance on machinery has withered our bodies.
- ergonaught 4y agoThe claim I made was that “work worth doing” was worth doing because of its effect on human beings. This is not the same thing as “work worth producing”. Ex: practicing scales on my guitar is work worth doing, because of its effect on me, not because it produces anything of value in itself or of interest to anyone. It is meaningless that my computer can do scales vastly better than I can, because the production of scales is not what makes the work worth doing.
- whimsicalism 4y agoI disagree. If the work leads to the production of something worthwhile net of any other losses from the work, the work is "worth doing." So "work worth producing" is, at minimum, a subset of "work worth doing"