25
AI is often discussed with a simple safeguard in mind: Keep a human in the loop. But what happens when AI is already shaping the information, options and recommendations that inform a decision? (www.usf.edu)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

all 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The human is there to double check the AI, not to be a rubber stamp. If they just blindly trust the AI, then there wasn't a point to putting the human there.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    The human is also pressured not to be a bottleneck because AI was supposed to increase productivity, and that means more rubber-stamping. That certainly becomes an issue when burnout sets in, what seems to be inevitable in these kind of functions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    I don't find that at all at my work, I have access to AI but I am in no way forced to use it. I can confidently say that most tasks I undertake cannot be made appreciably more efficient by using an AI. At the end of the day I'm liable for my decisions as an engineer and my decisions have the capability to affect whether a quite large group of people live or die. I need to be sure of the answer. I might use it as a search tool or to draft a template back bone, but I need to verify the information from a reliable source before I use it so I can't take a summary and assume it's right. I would need to read all sources and likely rewrite most of it anyway to feed it into a larger more targeted document so I might as well be writing it from scratch by utilising the sources directly. It is not feasible to get an existing AI to make effective drawing markups or modifications, I don't believe that capability will ever exist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent