Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Practicality 3909 days ago
Fair enough. I think that we need both. Just that I believe that we benefit more from the IA than the AI. The AI is the tool that gets us there. We need AI, but it's not enough.
1 comments

It's not even speculation: your point has tons of evidence backing it. I remember when I did AI that "automatic programming" was something we wanted. My research led to a project called The Programmer's Apprentice from MIT. The idea, since auto prog wasn't working, was a more limited A.I. that became an extension of programmer's mind to automate some work, analyse others, optimize even more, and so on. Not sure where that went but a Java programmer's explanation of NetBeans was deja vu. ;) A programmer with a text editor vs one with modern tools (I.A. + A.I.) is a game-changing difference that did effectively increase intelligence of the work.

Likewise, people not so smart with numbers had calculators. People needing conversions have Google and Frick. There's financial and accounting packages that can convert lots of numerical assessments into simpler forms to aid the user's understanding. ERP and BPM, done right, let a person ignore inconsequential details to focus on high-level aspects of business operation. Wikipedia for summaries + Google for details and verification let one amass expertise in a new domain rapidly.

And so on and so forth. Intelligence Augmentation and Artificial Intelligence both have proven value. Both are used today. So, we can keep both. :)