3 ms·
I just have to say that I consider this an absolutely hilarious outcome. For many years, I focused on tech solutions that eliminated the need for a human to be
by dekhn 1y ago
I just have to say that I consider this an absolutely hilarious outcome. For many years, I focused on tech solutions that eliminated the need for a human to be in front of a computer doing tedious manual operations. For a wide range of activities, I proposed we focus on "turning everything in the world into database objects" so that computers could operate on them with minimal human effort. I spent significant effort in machine learning to achieve this.
It didn't really occur to me that you could just train a computer to work directly on the semi-structured human world data (display screen buffer) through a human interface (mouse + keyboard).
However, I fully support it (like all the other crazy ideas on the web that beat out the "theoretically better" approaches). I do not think it is unrealistic to expect that within a decade, we could have computer systems that can open chrome, start a video chat with somebody, go back and forth for a while to achieve a task, then hang up... with the person on the other end ever knowing they were dealing with a computer instead of a human.
- TeMPOraL 1y agoAI is succeeding where "theoretically better" approaches failed, because it addresses the underlying social problem. The computing ecosystem is an adversarial place, not a cooperative one. The reason we can't automate most of the tedium is by design - it's critical to how almost all money is made on the Internet. Can't monetize users when they automate your upsell channels and ad exposure away.
- ncallaway 1y ago> we could have computer systems that can open chrome, start a video chat with somebody, go back and forth for a while to achieve a task, then hang up... with the person on the other end ever knowing they were dealing with a computer instead of a human. Doesn't that...seem bad? I mean, it would certainly be a monumental and impressive technical accomplishment. But it still seems...quite bad to me.
- NothingAboutAny 1y agoI saw similar discussions around robotics, people saying "why are they making the robots humanoid? couldn't they be a more efficient shape" and it comes back to the same thing where if you want the tool to be adopted then it has to fit in a human-centric world no matter how inefficient that is. high performance applications are still always custom designed and streamlined, but mass adoption requires it to fit us not us to fit it.
- neom 1y agoI was thinking about that last point in the context of dating this morning, if my "chatgpt" knew enough about me to represent me well enough that a dating app could facilitate a pre-screening with someone else "chatgpt", that would be interesting. I heard someone in an enterprise keynote recently talking about "digital twins" - I believe this is that. Not sure what I think about it yet generally, or where it leads.
- riebschlager 1y agoCongrats, you've won today's "Accidental Re-writing of a Black Mirror Episode" prize. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hang_the_DJ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hang_the_DJ
- deegles 1y ago> computer systems that can open chrome, start a video chat with somebody, go back and forth for a while to achieve a task, then hang up... all the pieces are there, though I suspect the first to implement this will be scammers and spear phishers.
- regularfry 1y agoWe will get to the point of degrading the computer output, having it intentionally make humanising mistakes, so that it's more believable.