Comment on Does AI need to be perfect to replace jobs?

deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

• Powderhorn@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Who, exactly, pays for this “cheaper”? And what of the wages for people who have to spend their time verifying LLM output? Yeah, my point is it doesn’t have to be perfect, but in the examples cited, there’s a fair amount of oversight.

  At least, there used to be.

  source

  • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    I meant it doesn’t need to be perfect. It only needs to just barely as good as the people it replaces and appear cheaper on a balance sheet/cash flow statement for the quarter. Otherwise every service company wouldn’t be buying crap ‘AI’ chat bots for all customer facing duties.

    Alternatively, self driving vehicles are probably already better than the bottom 50% of drivers in 50% of situations. I.e. driving on a road. We still want flawed human oversight of that.

    source