Comment by Slartie
5 hours ago
You call it "lack of ambition", implying a certain arrogance; more humble people might just call it "a different sweet spot" of AI integration. After all, the goal in the end is not to use up as many AI tokens as possible, but the goal is to implement/perform a certain business case in the best way possible with regard to cost/speed/quality.
It's not like everyone using AI has the same software development cycle. It's not even that everyone using AI is developing software.
I propose that there is no such sweet spot.
If the model cannot perform the task with adequate quality while being many times faster and cheaper than a human, it is not good enough in my view.
If a SOTA model would be good enough, surely that would be preferable to a human using cheap AI assistance for a moderate efficiency improvement.
A harness of limited capability is a component that doesn't exist in your proposal, right? Just like non-automatable or at least hard-to-automate things like physical actions to be performed in the real world as part of a business task do not exist, too? Same goes for coordination with other real humans - doesn't exist.
Why don't you give some examples of tasks that you think fall into this category, where AI assistance only is the perfect solution and which could not conceivable be done more effectively autonomously by more capable models?
For coding, I don't see it.
Physical tasks? I don't know, it's not my area of expertise. I do not think AI is widely deployed for physical tasks yet, not even the SOTA is good enough.