|
|
|
|
|
by chefandy
772 days ago
|
|
Sure, they may well be quantitatively better. If you were to create metrics to measure the number of mistakes or weird spots or overly annoying things, it's quite possible that the output from the algorithm could score better than human output, and the throughput would obviously be incomparable. But, whether or not something is qualitatively better is far more subjective-- it's influenced by our culture, our experiences, and everything else that creates the lens through which we see the world. Something's origin absolutely affects the way people experience it, be it a physical object, story, experience, etc. Don't get me wrong-- I realize there's real value in affordable quantity with with mediocre quality-- how many restaurants in the world are McDonald's? But then again, how many restaurants in the world aren't McDonald's? If McDonald's could sell you a ribeye comparable to Capital Grille, I'd be astonished if it put a dent in Capital Grille's bottom line. Applebees, however... |
|
1. You don’t like what that would mean about the destiny for humanity.
2. A human making it makes it inherently better.
3. If it’s lower quality, it’s lower quality.
I get why this would lead to strong beliefs. But these arguments aren’t very convincing.