6 ms·

I don't feel trapped. There is going to be (and has been in ways) a small reckoning when people realize magic (ai) and all its unpredictability is very difficul

I don't feel trapped. There is going to be (and has been in ways) a small reckoning when people realize magic (ai) and all its unpredictability is very difficult to manage. There is no field of "probabilistic UX" for example. How do you provide a consistent user experience when the underlying engine of your application is inconsistent? Same goes for QA, testing, root cause analysis. Adding features can have exponential side effects that cannot be predicted, which can be deadly at scale. Both figuratively and literally depending on how the technology is adopted.

echelon 3y ago
> small reckoning when people realize magic (ai) and all its unpredictability is very difficult to manage. Deploy it in the right places first. Most people don't realize it's the arts where this works the best. They're too focused on LLMs and reasoning, but the first verticals that work will all be image, video, audio, and games. If you're imperfect, the human creator driving the creation can easily repair it. Nobody dies, no business is lost. Millions of hours are saved. Large capital intensive businesses get disrupted and democratized. Self-driving cars will be last.
- emseetech 3y ago
  > Deploy it in the right places first. 100% agreed. Unfortunately that’s not what we’re seeing.
bberenberg 3y ago
> There is no field of "probabilistic UX" for example. How do you provide a consistent user experience when the underlying engine of your application is inconsistent? Sure there is. Every single in person store you go into and how staff are trained to interact with customers. It’s hard, and yet there are clear experts in it.
- emseetech 3y ago
  Is that a 1:1 comparison? There's a considerable difference between human-human interaction and human-computer interaction.
  - sdenton4 3y ago
    Also consider human-horse interaction. The horse was quite useful for most of human history, despite not being perfectly reliable.
    - emseetech 3y ago
      Please explain yourself, otherwise this comes off as an unhelpful non-sequitur.
      - anomaly_ 3y ago
        Mate, why would you need this explained in detail to you? You claimed that there is no field of probabilistic UX and that it would be difficult to "provide a consistent user experience when the underlying engine of your application is inconsistent" -- the other posters just gave you two highly analogous examples where humans have been dealing with inconsistent UX for thousands of years.
        emseetech 3y ago
        I guess I do need it explained. What is the horse in this situation? > humans have been dealing with inconsistent UX for thousands of years. Like I said: between humans. Or animals. But do you believe the average consumer is going to put in the equivalent amount of effort it takes to break and ride a horse?
        sdenton4 3y ago
        The horse is a horse. They were a major part of human transportation and trade networks for a very long time. The point is that humans have millennia of experience working with and relying on animal intelligence. Animals actually provide an interesting model for contextualizing artificial intelligence; the parallels are inescapable once you start looking at it.

echelon 3y ago

> small reckoning when people realize magic (ai) and all its unpredictability is very difficult to manage. Deploy it in the right places first. Most people don't realize it's the arts where this works the best. They're too focused on LLMs and reasoning, but the first verticals that work will all be image, video, audio, and games. If you're imperfect, the human creator driving the creation can easily repair it. Nobody dies, no business is lost. Millions of hours are saved. Large capital intensive businesses get disrupted and democratized. Self-driving cars will be last.

emseetech 3y ago
> Deploy it in the right places first. 100% agreed. Unfortunately that’s not what we’re seeing.

bberenberg 3y ago

> There is no field of "probabilistic UX" for example. How do you provide a consistent user experience when the underlying engine of your application is inconsistent? Sure there is. Every single in person store you go into and how staff are trained to interact with customers. It’s hard, and yet there are clear experts in it.

emseetech 3y ago
Is that a 1:1 comparison? There's a considerable difference between human-human interaction and human-computer interaction.
- sdenton4 3y ago
  Also consider human-horse interaction. The horse was quite useful for most of human history, despite not being perfectly reliable.
  - emseetech 3y ago
    Please explain yourself, otherwise this comes off as an unhelpful non-sequitur.
    - anomaly_ 3y ago
      Mate, why would you need this explained in detail to you? You claimed that there is no field of probabilistic UX and that it would be difficult to "provide a consistent user experience when the underlying engine of your application is inconsistent" -- the other posters just gave you two highly analogous examples where humans have been dealing with inconsistent UX for thousands of years.
      - emseetech 3y ago
        I guess I do need it explained. What is the horse in this situation? > humans have been dealing with inconsistent UX for thousands of years. Like I said: between humans. Or animals. But do you believe the average consumer is going to put in the equivalent amount of effort it takes to break and ride a horse?
        sdenton4 3y ago
        The horse is a horse. They were a major part of human transportation and trade networks for a very long time. The point is that humans have millennia of experience working with and relying on animal intelligence. Animals actually provide an interesting model for contextualizing artificial intelligence; the parallels are inescapable once you start looking at it.