3 ms·
False. Accountability is the result of difficulty of things. As things get easier you need fewer accountable people. Like, you need a guy who understands Linux
by simianwords 1mo ago
False. Accountability is the result of difficulty of things. As things get easier you need fewer accountable people.
Like, you need a guy who understands Linux and be accountable for Linux working well in your company. But if Linux does a good job that doesn’t leak, you don’t need a Linux guy.
- benedictevans 1mo agoWho decides whether Linux is doing well enough? Who is responsible for fixing bugs or incorporating new requirements? Who is checking that it follows this month's new regulatory requirements? As the tasks scales to become more important, any organization needs to have systematic answers to those kinds of questions. And yes, you can use software for that (we always did!), but you still need a human somewhere who is exercising judgment.
- pixl97 1mo agoI mean with the METR report on the HF attack we saw spontaneous self organization in that model. I'm not saying that currently replaces human judgment but it does appear there are paths to complex AI agents systems that handle a lot of this.
- ryuuseijin 1mo agoAgreed, as things get easier you need fewer accountable people. Organisations will shrink, people will be more accountable by themselves for things they ask the agent to do instead of having an accountable person do it for them. On the other hand, I think for complicated software there is such a long tail of things that can go wrong, and in your linux example with disastrous consequences, people will pay good money for a long time to have someone who they can call if there is a problem. In the business they have the term indemnification - that's what companies like redhat provide for linux for example and it's probably a big part of what makes them a billion dollar business.