• GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    9 days ago

    Let’s say the error rate is 0.1%. Pretty low, right. But that’s one mistake per thousand flights. Are they really okay with one plane out of a thousand potentially crashing? There are certain industries and jobs where AI simply cannot and should not be used.

    • Napster153@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 days ago

      Sarcasm:

      But think of the insurance people! Look at how many insurances are waiting to be denied and robbed!

      More importantly, we can justify every other profit increase, because our economies are built on literal exploitation just as they did a couple hundred years prior!

      Modern exploiting problems require modern idol solutions.

      • Heikki2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Sadly there is part of the population that will view that as a valid argument. Faux News, news max, OAN and all the conservative talk radio will feed it to them

    • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 days ago

      Even further: the biggest problem with AI and thus the biggest decider on its suitability or not for something is that its distribution of failure in terms of consequence is uniform rather than it being more likely to err in ways with few or less grevious consequences than in ways with more or worse consequences.

      In other words, unlike humans who activelly try and avoid making the nastiest and deadly mistakes, when AI fails, it can fail just as easilly in the most horrible and deadly ways as it can in the most minor of ways.

      That’s why you have lots of instances of LLMs giving what for humans are obviously dangerous advice like telling people to put glue on pizza to make it look good or those with suicidal thoughts to kill themselves - unlike humans AI has no mechanism to detect “obviously dangerous” on an output it’s about to produce and generate a different output instead.

      This is why using AI to generate fluff filling for e-mails is fine but it’s not fine in systems were errors can easilly cost lives.