4 ms·
Many of those people would be adequately served with a pair of glasses. This, wouldn't help them, even if they had both a device capable of using it and the me
by wokwokwok 3y ago
Many of those people would be adequately served with a pair of glasses.
This, wouldn't help them, even if they had both a device capable of using it and the means to pay for it.
Even if it could help people, it's an open question if it would be safe, to, for example, use this to scan medication when it is only a probabilistic model that may hallucinate something that isn't actually there.
What you're talking about is a speculative use of a service that might one day exist based on this technology.
What I am talking about is this actual service.
- famouswaffles 3y ago>What you're talking about is a speculative use of a service that might one day exist based on this technology. It's not a speculative service that might one day happen. Literally it's rolling out right now https://www.bemyeyes.com/blog/announcing-be-my-ai https://www.bemyeyes.com/blog/announcing-be-my-ai
- bastawhiz 3y ago> Many of those people would be adequately served with a pair of glasses. These people are being served by a preview of the service _right now_. > Even if it could help people, it's an open question if it would be safe, to, for example, use this to scan medication when it is only a probabilistic model that may hallucinate something that isn't actually there. Any OCR solution could also make a mistake, like misrecognizing a dosage on a prescription label. > What you're talking about is a speculative use of a service that might one day exist based on this technology. > What I am talking about is this actual service. GPT-4 is six months old. ChatGPT is less than a year old. Why would you benchmark a service by the initial public preview? Of course it's _speculative use_, the damn thing has had its tires kicked for like a day.