4 ms·
If 1 person can use an excavator/AI, then a 100 person crew can use 100 excavators/AIs. Capabilities have increased for everyone, not just for 1 man operations.
by NAHWheatCracker 2y ago
If 1 person can use an excavator/AI, then a 100 person crew can use 100 excavators/AIs. Capabilities have increased for everyone, not just for 1 man operations.
- 6stringmerc 2y agoHave you seen how big excavators are physically? There are functional limits to certain tools. I can see how software could become a hot mess if AI tools aren’t calibrated or the human element makes a mess of combining disparate parts.
- NAHWheatCracker 2y agoIt's a metaphor.
- adamhartenz 2y agoIn this scenario, it's like the excavators are pocket sized, and cheap. As cheap as the shovel. So there is no reason for the entire digging crew not to have one each
- onlypassingthru 2y agoIn this analogy, how many ditches do you think need to be dug? Each company only has a limited number of ditches they need done. The unnecessary human diggers will be let go.
- NAHWheatCracker 2y agoI didn't make the original analogy. I was just explaining part of the point. I disagree with the number 100. It is not a reasonable number with respect to current AI capabilities. If the cost of digging ditches goes down, companies will be apt to dig more ditches. I've seen many projects worth $100k-$500k but they weren't pursued because the cost in salaries was higher. I don't think companies are generally well run to let go of unnecessary people efficiently. At least one place I've worked at had, by my estimates, $100m salary of unnecessary people employed. It didn't matter, the business has revenues of $100b yearly, so it's a drop in the bucket.