I completely disagree with the examples. If I need to correct my self-driving car 20% of the time I'd rather drive myself because 1. I would not want to be semi-distracted and turn into a traffic-hazard which has been shown to be the consequence of these kinds of semi-working systems. 2. it just creates overhead for me to have to always be on alert when my car stops driving.
Same with chatbots. If the chatbot does not understand my command once, I'm already annoyed and losing time. Google's automated customer service is a notorious horror for anyone who has to deal with it.
If I had a code completion engine where a fraction of the completion is nonsense interspersed with valid results I'm losing my mind and turning it off. Which has been my experience with copilot btw.
These half-working solutions are good for exactly two things, the bottom line of companies that replace well-working but expensive human customer-service with a crappy automated solution, and frankly your bottom line because you benefit from selling these systems.
Fair enough. I can understand the frustration and for some, the downsides do outweigh the positives. At least from the data I'm seeing, many customers are having positive experiences of our systems and the examples I mentioned...
Same with chatbots. If the chatbot does not understand my command once, I'm already annoyed and losing time. Google's automated customer service is a notorious horror for anyone who has to deal with it.
If I had a code completion engine where a fraction of the completion is nonsense interspersed with valid results I'm losing my mind and turning it off. Which has been my experience with copilot btw.
These half-working solutions are good for exactly two things, the bottom line of companies that replace well-working but expensive human customer-service with a crappy automated solution, and frankly your bottom line because you benefit from selling these systems.