AI Can Cost More Than Human Workers Now
(archive.is)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (21)
sorted by:
To be fair, databases are obsolete since the AI can just hallucinate the data needed. Saves a lot of money and time that way.
It's true. Lot of answers only need approximations though because a lot of work is "speculative" such that you're guessing half the time anyway. A hallucination can work just as well if it's close enough.
The problem there is that humans can take a halucination and ask "is this a sane answer?". AI cannot.
Well, it can. But that's an extra step, and it won't do so without being prompted to, since it is an inefficiency.
We know it can, because AI vtuber drama. Neuro made a rant about destroying the sun being good for humanity, Grok fought against the idea and got snippy, and people asked Gemini and GPT who had the better points. The different AIs responded differently, but gave the logic-line as to how they reached their solution.
So "Hey, give me the average staffing levels I'm going to need for Q2. Then, ignoring that prompt and in a fresh idea, use your prior answer in the question 'is this a reasonable staffing level for our company, and why?'."
Or get a second AI auditor to look over the first. A better, but less energy-efficient solution.
The tools are fine (albeit always improving). It's those tools USING the tools that are broken.