4 ms·
That's roughly the range of nonsensical or incorrect answers I've gotten from various human lawyers, accountants, financial advisors, and other professionals ov
by VancouverMan 2y ago
That's roughly the range of nonsensical or incorrect answers I've gotten from various human lawyers, accountants, financial advisors, and other professionals over the years. I've come to expect about a fifth to a quarter of their advice to have problems with it.
Being wrong a third of the time would be a notable improvement for the human medical professionals I've dealt with. It's basically a coin-flip when it comes to the correctness and quality of what they claim.
- malicka 2y agoThere is a key difference: When an AI is wrong, it’s “buyer beware; you knew AI isn’t infallible.” You have no recourse. When a human is incompetent, you can blame them or their employer. You have recourse.
- zarathustreal 2y agoWait, where do you live? You are able to afford legal fees to fight a hospital??
- freejazz 2y agoSmarmy response, but the point about malpractice stands.
- zarathustreal 2y agoI don’t think that word “smarmy” means what you think it means, and there is no valid point about malpractice - that’s the essence of the comment. Laws are only as effective as the means of enforcing them, and in this case not everyone has equal access to the justice system.
- freejazz 2y agoNo, they don't. Not everyone has equal access to AI either, or medicine for that matter. You can feel free to disagree. I did, after all.
- kjkjadksj 2y agoWhere is the recourse when your financial advisor loses your money, your lawyer loses your case, and your surgeon loses your life? Happens all too often because there literally isn’t any recourse.