4 ms·

>A human would probably ask clarifying questions You say that, and that's a possibility, and maybe in your experience that is true. But I'd say I've found act

>A human would probably ask clarifying questions You say that, and that's a possibility, and maybe in your experience that is true. But I'd say I've found actual humans will frequently use existing internal models of something unless they have a reason to believe something has changed to invalidate that. We even have a well worn joke about what happens when you assume. >you could for example be involved with multiple teams of different sizes that are subject to different rules Just to clarify, my experience with the memory of these tools doesn't provide any data (for or against) how well/poorly the memory may work with someone who is involved with multiple teams.

fc417fc802 3mo ago
> I'd say I've found actual humans will frequently use existing internal models of something Sure, I didn't mean to claim that humans perform perfectly. Merely to reference a particular approach in order to illustrate my point about modeling concepts. > doesn't provide any data (for or against) It seems a foregone conclusion that it would confuse details between the different contexts in a way that a human (ie an entity with a certain level of world model and reasoning ability) would not be expected to.