No sinister plot here or collusion. What if AI is just objectively better at most things a human can do? Would you be willing to pay extra for worse human provided performance just to keep people employed?
Mark Zuckerberg is floating the idea that Meta’s “AI Friends” will be more loyal and likeable than your real ones. {{ LOL }}
ChatGPT has become very chatty lately. It actively tries to engage you in conversation, and does a pretty good job of it. I had it create a materials and cut list for a shed I want to build and pretty soon I was discussing Japanese wood joinery.
Personally I hate that many people in tech are trying to make humans irrelevant. We are taking the humanity out of society, and I think this is a path that is going to be damaging for society. For most of my 36 years in tech I have thought we were making the world a better place for people. I stopped believing that close to 10 years ago.
I’ve been around when the local healthcare group’s telehealth contact calls to “check” on a friend.
The “service” is crummy. The “benefit” is LOW. IMO, the main purpose is to use low pay, low skill representatives and bill Medicare for a “visit”.
In every case, the telehealth rep comes across as “bored, going through the motions”.
I, personally, would much rather have an AI that interacts with me like a friend, and in the process collects actual health data.
Doubtful that it would just ask you and record your answer. More likely, if you used one of those DIY cuffs it would Bluetooth the data to your phone and an app would send it along with the date/time, pulse and some other data like how much you’ve been walking around, etc.
Then it might ask you a few random and different questions where the answer makes no difference just to get you to talk, then use AI to check your breathing patterns and compare to your history. Then, if part of your plan, ask you for your meal choice for the meals-on-wheels delivery arriving soon via robo-meals.