• Zagorath@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    the user needs to be smart enough to do whatever they’re asking anyway

    I’m gonna say that’s ideal but not quite necessary. What’s needed is that the user is capable of properly verifying the output. Which anyone who could do it themselves definitely can, but it can be done more broadly. It’s an easier skill to verify a result than it is to obtain that result. Think: how film critics don’t necessarily need to be filmmakers, or the P=NP question in computer science.

    • Pyro@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      But if the output has issues, what’re you going to do, prompt it again? If you are only able to verify but not do the task, you cannot correct the AI’s mistakes yourself.

      • Zagorath@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        At the risk of sounding like an overly obsequious AI… You know what, you’re completely right. I’m honestly not sure what use case I was imagining when I wrote that last comment.

        • Redjard@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Making text flow naturally, grouping and ordeeing information, good writing.

          You can verify two textst have the same facts and information, yet one reads way better than the other. But writing a text that reads well is quite hard.

      • Redjard@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        If you don’t habe the ability then you would do what you would have 5 years ago: not do it
        Either submit without, or not submit at all.