|
|
|
|
|
by jqpabc123
5 days ago
|
|
I get a much better starting point in much less time. So you're not actually reviewing the results? If you were, the time wouldn't be "much less". You're getting something that you *assume* is a better starting point but you don't really know if the results are flawed or not. If Google AI was telling people your mom was an ax murderer, would you *assume* it is providing a good starting point? This is what AI does --- it lulls people into accepting bad results as a time saver. And this is the root of legal liability issues. |
|
I'm very much human-in-the-loop oriented. If you had seen any of my talks, you would understand this. Please refrain from making assumptions about how everyone uses Ai and putting them into a single classification. It's not what's going on.