3 ms·
I just realized how refreshing it is to read an honest take like "from 2-3 documents an hour to 8-10 documents an hour" instead of "it's doing the work of a mon
by ManuelKiessling 8d ago
I just realized how refreshing it is to read an honest take like "from 2-3 documents an hour to 8-10 documents an hour" instead of "it's doing the work of a month in 5 minutes!!!!1".
- deleted 8d ago[deleted]
- eru 8d agoAgreed. However: That's a factor of 3 to 5 improvement reported on here. If you keep stacking these kinds of improvements, you end up at month to minutes pretty quickly.
- monax 8d ago10 women can't make a baby in a month
- eru 8d agoThroughput-wise, they can. Latency-wise, you are right.
- egeozcan 8d agoSorry for being so detached from the discussion and your actual point but if someone had made a dystopian sci-fi novel with the tagline following your sentence with "...or can they?", and made it all cheesy, I'd read it in one sitting.
- lukan 8d agoYou mean each women all producing parts of the baby one then one women/machine putting all the parts together?
- egeozcan 8d agoIn the future, because of bad things we did to the atmosphere and stuff, miscarriages are the common ending of a pregnancy, instead of being the exception. One evil company finds a way to accelerate the process by using 10 women, lowering the chances of miscarriage simply by reducing the time in womb. I thought, something like a medication helping the women develop the baby in 30 days, but seriously damages the host in a couple of days, so the fetus gets transferred from host to host. Some die, but the evil rich don't care. Your idea could also work though. I realize that this is totally the wrong corner of the internet to post this but I guess today I'll just go with it.
- lukan 8d agoYeah, that plot might actually work and is more believable than mine. (some women actually do feel like a baby is a parasite growing inside them - this would be a extreme version of it)
- eru 8d agoAs a prediction, it doesn't sound particularly likely. As a premise for science fiction, it sounds like it might be interesting.
- croon 8d agoI'm too bad of a writer to be scared of giving my ideas away, but I'd explore a pupae stage, where (layman disclaimer, if it isn't abundantly clear from my incoming butchering of the science) the butterfly is basically melted down into a goop with no "brain part" or "feet part" of the goop existing until reformed, yet retain their memories. If you divided that goop up and imagined there was a gestation time reduction, before combining it for the final stage of formation, you'd have some "plausible" (loose definition here) venue for it.
- eru 8d agoInterestingly, real butterflies don't turn into goop, that's more of an 'urban legend'. Nature's more interesting than that.
- Cthulhu_ 8d agoBrave New World (and probably many other sci-fi) basically skips this problem entirely by having babies be mass-produced in bottles.
- eru 8d agoSince we are already on a tangent: In one part of Brave New World they bring up that they tried to do more automation, but people got restless without the drudgery. In another part, they bring up that they tried to have a society with only Alphas, but they didn't want to do the drudgery. I wonder why they never tried combining both?
- weatherlite 8d agoYou want to read a novel about ten women making cheese in one month?
- egeozcan 8d agoThat wasn't what I was going for but, why not?
- leptons 8d agoThe AI can't make a reliable judgement, so now you have to hire 3x to 5x more to make those judgements if you have the documents coming in at 3x to 5x faster. Or you'll have one severely overworked lawyer. It's the same problem developers have with thousands of AI generated PRs. Just because you speed up one thing doesn't mean the whole system works faster, and yes a human really does need to be in the loop or you end up with even bigger problems, and lawsuits.
- franciscop 8d agoNo, that'd only be true the judgement was the full work. If the judgement was 33% of the work and the rest was just old plain e.g. typing, that is now fully automated and instantaneous, then you automate 2/3 of the work, getting 3x in productivity.
- liquicity 8d agoWhy can't it make a judgement grounded in real data points - then the human can accept / deny that proof much quicker? Surely there's a middle ground / this is faster than reading all papers front to back.
- gf000 8d agoThat doesn't take into account dependencies between tasks, where bottlenecks can happen. In any case, Amdahl's law applies regarding what kind of speedup you can get in such a case.
- alansaber 8d agoCompounding like this ignores fundamental friction. You can attempt a huge document processing factory but quality will go into the toilet.
- 00deadbeef 8d agoWell now that Astra for Law is here I give it about five minutes before social media grifters claim to be 10x lawyers
- hkt 8d agoWhich will end hilariously, let's face it
- rayiner 8d agoBut wouldn't that be great if true? Why all the negativity over the prospect of leveling the playing between people lucky enough to be born with high IQs and average people? High IQ is a completely unearned gift and AI might reduce that fundamental source of unfairness in the world.
- 00deadbeef 6d agoBut my point is it won't be true, and people like to lie and exaggerate to get clicks and sell people courses
- totetsu 8d agoI was thinking about this today. I am definitely making things easier but.. if I was paying the actual costs of this service, could it even be close to worth it?
- glimshe 8d agoPeople will eventually realize that this is exactly what AI does for most workflows. The propaganda is "synthetic humans", "obsolete mathematicians" and so forth, but what we will likely see is a fantastic time saver for things we didn't like to do to begin with.
- stasomatic 8d agoIt's not a time saver in that you, as an employee, don't get more time to yourself. You get to work more. Can you walk up to your boss and tell them that you are going to start working 20 hours a week instead of 40? I use these things daily, not against this kind of "AI" at all.
- Melatonic 8d agoYou can if you don't tell them :-D
- sneak 8d agoIf you’re a contractor, sure, same as always. If you’re an employee, you are selling a quantity of your time, not your results. Of course you will have to work the same amount of time. Your issue is with employment as a general concept, wherein the employer reaps any efficiency gains, not the worker.
- freedomben 8d agoYou're not wrong of course, but removing the tedious parts of a job can be really nice. I still work the same hours of course, but now I get to work on things that are more meaningful, more design and architecture oriented, and less about the grind of tedium. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions out there, so I don't want to generalize, but I do suspect there are a number of people in a similar situation as me.
- stasomatic 8d agoHow can we deal with this mental overload? There are only so many things that I can keep in my head. Your job was to deliver Project X and you did it in half the time. What do you do with the other half? Your job was to deliver X. Now what? Extra vacation time? Just musing.