Hardly, you need to maintain the same numbers to double check the work of AI. Haven’t improved throughput, but this guarantees better quality

I think it’s the other way around. They said we need to slow down AI so this story is now being told

If we’re making up numbers my point is that with 100 employees using AI you get 2x the quality than 50 employees using AI

Because now you exluded the option of having the employee choose which applications to have Ai process and which need human review - the option that delivers the most quality

Because the alternative to saving money with AI is providing better services with AI - if it can be done. And the people to do that are the people doing the job.

I find this kind of response insufferable. It shifts the conversation from a systems critique to personal responsibility. You could have posted this in response the OP, and it would be equally on point and useless.

I have personalized ads turned of in YouTube and it seems half the ads are for gambling as of late.

I mean ICE is both a joke and a scary brute squad.

And anyone who has a retirement holding index funds is also complicit?

How dare you have a healthy response to this garbage

No, but Milo threatened his friends to not defend him less they be a target of a harassment campaign.

Being critAI is being proAI.

Someone give this person a congressional hearing and billions of dollars to burn

And if we had universal healthcare it would actually be cheaper to produce those cars. Canada is proof of this.

“Oil unable to navigate Trump’s Strait”

“Ships lost trying to cross Trump’s Strait”

I think if I said this enough times I would likely say “Trump’s taint”, it kinda ryhmes

Epstein class wants to make sure the people doing the investigation are understanding…

Isreal trying their best to prove the antisemites are right

Maybe we can’t but climate change could.

Talk about a loss for all those who voted for irresponsible use if AI /s

This is what share holder value looks like.