>current AI should not be used for serious applications.
"If an an artificial person can do a job and make fewer mistakes than a real person, why not?"
Is the question everyone in business is asking.
"If an an artificial person can do a job and make fewer mistakes than a real person, why not?"
Is the question everyone in business is asking.
The very simple answer to that is that the artificial person can’t do the full job of a person yet.
Being good or better at certain parts of a job does not mean it can do the whole job effectively.
In reality, neither the client nor the user base have access to the ground truth of these "AI system"s to determine actual reliability and efficiency.
That's not to say there aren't some genuine ML/AGI companies like DeepMind (which solve specific narrow problems with quite high confidently), but most of the "AI" companies feel like they are coming from Crypto and are now selling little more than vaporware in the AI gold rush.
Apple is the world's most valuable company, and many would attribute a strong part of their success to Jobs' legacy of high-quality decision-making. But anyone who has worked in a large company understands that there's no way Apple can so consistently produce their wide range of highly integrated, high quality products with only a top-down mandate from one person; especially a dead one. It takes thousands of people, the right people, given the right level of authority, making high-quality high-creativity decisions. It also, obviously, takes the daily process, an awe-inspiring global supply chain, automation systems, and these are areas that computers, and now AI, can have a high impact in. But that automation is a commodity now. Samsung has access to that same automation, and they make fridges and TVs; so why aren't they worth almost four trillion dollars?
AI doesn't replace humans; it, like computers more generally before it, brings the process cost of the inhuman things it can automate to zero. When that cost is zero, AI cannot be a differentiating factor between two businesses. The differentiating factors, instead, become the capital the businesses already have to deploy (favoring of established players), and the humans who interact with the AI, interpreting and when necessary executing on its decisions.
“A computer can never be held accountable. Therefore, a computer must never make a management decision.”
There are lots of bullshit jobs that we could automate away, AI or no. This is far from a new problem. Our current "AI" solutions promise to do it cheaper, but detecting and dealing with "hallucinations" is turning out to be more expensive than anticipated and it's not at all clear to me that this will be the silver bullet that the likes of Sam Altman claims it will be.
Even if the AI solution makes fewer mistakes, the magnitude of those mistakes matter. The human might make transcription errors with patient data or other annoying but fixable clerical errors, while the AI may be perfect with transcription but make completely sensible sounding but ultimately nonsense diagnosis, with dangerous consequences.
It is only irrelevant in the degree to which companies have been able to skirt laws and literally get away with murder.