Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
Here's my (partial) take on "AI" regulations.
Now that the genie is out of the bottle, we already know some organization in some country is going to proceed with developing AI. Thus, regulations meant to kill it are wasted effort. Instead, we'll all be better off if we figure out ways to focus where AI development efforts are heading.
And that includes finding ways to spread the benefits more evenly throughout society, while preventing those who develop and deploy AI-based tools from pushing the costs / harms on others.
"But that sounds like socialism!," I hear you saying. Not at all. Think about the places where AI-based tools are likely to be deployed first: "anywhere that paid humans interact with human customers" is going to be high up on the list. So we have to ensure that the costs aren't borne only by the customers and (former) employees and that the benefits don't acrue only to the companies that formerly employeed the customer service staffers.
That includes requiring that there be a way for a human customer to escape the robot and interact with another human instead.
-
Embed this notice
I did see an article fairly recently in which retail stores that replaced human cashiers with automated checkout lines found that human customers needed a significant amount of help using the terminals, so that the companies couldn't reduce staff as much as expected. The automated checkout lines were also not significantly faster, on average, than human-staffed checkout lines.
And customers were getting very frustrated over it.
This doesn't even count the claims about massive increases in theft.
(My personal thing has always been that if I'm going to do work myself that you otherwise would have paid someone else to do, you need to split the savings with me. Well, that and you need to pay for employee retraining.)