5 ms·

It's besides the point, the point is this is an "AI" based product and generally tech is supposed to be an improvement on the status quo, the fact that "x might

It's besides the point, the point is this is an "AI" based product and generally tech is supposed to be an improvement on the status quo, the fact that "x might also have issues or blind spots" isn't really relevant? This argument that "humans are flawed too" is not useful, we know humans are flawed, that's why we want tech to fill those gaps, not flawed / potentially dangerous tech, actual tech like how a plane flies you to your destination 99.9% of the time.

lolinder 3y ago
This is an improvement over the status quo—there are several blind people who have commented on this thread saying that they are reluctant to use the human service unless they absolutely have to. Giving them an AI tool that can use in low-stakes situations is a huge improvement over not having a tool at all, and the human service is still there for the high-stakes situations they were already willing to use it for.
- dmazzoni 3y ago
  Also, there are many low-stakes situations where AI is actually quite a bit better than the average human: 1. Take a photo of a piece of tech: AI can not only describe what's going on but tell you exactly how to fix it (e.g. "it's showing a fatal error. hold down the power button for 10 seconds to reboot it") 2. Take a photo of clothing: AI uses consistent, neutral language to describe garments, while humans would all describe the same item differently based on where they live, their own personal style, their region, etc. 3. Take a photo in a major city or near a famous landmark, AI will recognize it and tell you about your location, whereas a random human has probably never been there before 4. Take a photo of an insurance bill, AI can explain what some of the technical terms mean if you don't understand them 5. Take a photo of a menu, ask it to summarize all of the vegetarian entrees and it will list them in seconds ("one veggie burger, one stir fry with tofu, three sandwiches and all of the salads"); a human might take a minute or two to carefully read the menu and give a much longer answer
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  ...I know. To be fair, humans make mistakes at an incredible rate. Even the ones who make life or death decisions. I'm talking about the constant stating of the obvious, if these models weren't useful we wouldn't deploy them. It's like the whole internet constantly making the statement "cars are better at covering distances in shorter time frames than humans"...we know, that's why we build them and pay a bunch of money for them.

lolinder 3y ago

This is an improvement over the status quo—there are several blind people who have commented on this thread saying that they are reluctant to use the human service unless they absolutely have to. Giving them an AI tool that can use in low-stakes situations is a huge improvement over not having a tool at all, and the human service is still there for the high-stakes situations they were already willing to use it for.

dmazzoni 3y ago
Also, there are many low-stakes situations where AI is actually quite a bit better than the average human: 1. Take a photo of a piece of tech: AI can not only describe what's going on but tell you exactly how to fix it (e.g. "it's showing a fatal error. hold down the power button for 10 seconds to reboot it") 2. Take a photo of clothing: AI uses consistent, neutral language to describe garments, while humans would all describe the same item differently based on where they live, their own personal style, their region, etc. 3. Take a photo in a major city or near a famous landmark, AI will recognize it and tell you about your location, whereas a random human has probably never been there before 4. Take a photo of an insurance bill, AI can explain what some of the technical terms mean if you don't understand them 5. Take a photo of a menu, ask it to summarize all of the vegetarian entrees and it will list them in seconds ("one veggie burger, one stir fry with tofu, three sandwiches and all of the salads"); a human might take a minute or two to carefully read the menu and give a much longer answer
ChatGTP 3y ago
...I know. To be fair, humans make mistakes at an incredible rate. Even the ones who make life or death decisions. I'm talking about the constant stating of the obvious, if these models weren't useful we wouldn't deploy them. It's like the whole internet constantly making the statement "cars are better at covering distances in shorter time frames than humans"...we know, that's why we build them and pay a bunch of money for them.