3 ms·
I don't think professional athletes are that dismissive of the collective wisdom of real-world experts, and are in fact much more likely to pay for the "human p
by keiferski 2y ago
I don't think professional athletes are that dismissive of the collective wisdom of real-world experts, and are in fact much more likely to pay for the "human premium" and not a soulless chatbot, no matter how advanced its information.
- falcor84 2y agoBut the LLM is almost literally "the collective wisdom of real-world experts" rather than a single one. Obviously it's not at that level yet, but I don't see a clear upper bound to it getting there. I'm not very familiar with athletes, but from what I know, regardless of the "human premium", if the AI coach helps their competitors perform better, they'll need to adapt or "perish".
- keiferski 2y agoCoaching, especially at elite levels, isn't about information. At that point the human connection to a coach with championship experience is better than pretty much any conceivable chatbot.
- chris_pie 2y agoI'm confused, why would you insist on using an LLM for decision making? It's not "the collective wisdom", it's a probabilistic language model. I imagine LLMs are better suited as a last step. I'd want a proper model to infer a decision, and an LLM to transform it to a human-friendly-formatted advice.