2 ms·

> If humans remain in the loop, the promise of AI is broken. In any craft, if assistants remain in the loop, the promise of mastery is broken. Or is it? In t

> If humans remain in the loop, the promise of AI is broken. In any craft, if assistants remain in the loop, the promise of mastery is broken. Or is it? In the contemporary art world, artists and their workshops enjoy a remarkably symbiotic relationship. ... It can be difficult, however, from our contemporary perspective to reconcile the group mentality of workshop practice with the pervasive characterization of individual artistic talent. This enduring belief in the singular “genius” of artists ... is a construct slowly being dismantled through scholarly probing of the origins and functions of the renaissance workshop. The modern engineer would do well to model after Raphael: Soon after he arrived in Rome, Raphael established a vibrant network of artists* who were able to channel his “brand” and thereby meet (or at the very least, attempt to meet) the extraordinary demand for his work. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/renaissance-reformation/early-renaissance1/beginners-renaissance-florence/a/the-role-of-the-workshop-in-italian-renaissance-art https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/renaissance-reformati... * read: agents

proc0 1y ago
The difference here is that there wouldn't even be a need for Raphael, at least if all the projections are right as to where AI is going. Replacing humans with other humans is one thing. Replacing humans with machines is on a completely different level. Anyone that says we will work along AI has not thought this through. In contrast to the industrial revolution where machines are doing things that humans are not capable of, i.e. lifting heavy things, bending and shaping steel, mixing tons of cement, etc., AI is taking over what makes humans unique as a species: our cognitive abilities. Of course, all of this hinges on whether AI will reach this level of reasoning and cognition, which right now is not certain. LLMs did scale up to have impressive and surprising abilities, but it's not clear if more scaling will produce actually intelligent agents that can correct themselves and have reliable output. Not to mention the compute cost which is orders of magnitude more than the human brain and will be a huge limitation.

proc0 1y ago

The difference here is that there wouldn't even be a need for Raphael, at least if all the projections are right as to where AI is going. Replacing humans with other humans is one thing. Replacing humans with machines is on a completely different level. Anyone that says we will work along AI has not thought this through. In contrast to the industrial revolution where machines are doing things that humans are not capable of, i.e. lifting heavy things, bending and shaping steel, mixing tons of cement, etc., AI is taking over what makes humans unique as a species: our cognitive abilities. Of course, all of this hinges on whether AI will reach this level of reasoning and cognition, which right now is not certain. LLMs did scale up to have impressive and surprising abilities, but it's not clear if more scaling will produce actually intelligent agents that can correct themselves and have reliable output. Not to mention the compute cost which is orders of magnitude more than the human brain and will be a huge limitation.