0·
8 days agoThe clergy and worshippers said they enjoyed it, but agreed it wouldn’t replace services led by humans anytime soon.
“It was pretty entertaining and fun, but it didn’t feel like a Mass or a service. … It felt distant. I didn’t feel like they were talking to me,” Taru Nieminen told The Associated Press.
The Rev. Kari Kanala, the vicar at St. Paul’s, echoed her sentiment.
“The warmth of the people is what people need,” he said.
I mean, isn’t that basically how every AI project goes? “It’s a fun novelty, but actually expecting anything deeper from it always gives you a hollow experience”? Maybe we don’t need to try doing everything with AI, maybe we can just assume it’ll be the case and move on
We’re not talking about an AI running a nuclear reactor, this article is about AI assistants on a personal phone. 0.001% failure rates for apps on your phone isn’t that insane, and generally the only consequence of those failures would be you need to try a slightly different query. Tools like Alexa or Siri mishear user commands probably more than 0.001% of the time, and yet those tools have absolutely caught on for a significant amount of people.
The issue is that the failure rate of AI is high enough that you have to vet the outputs which typically requires about as much work as doing whatever you wanted the AI to do yourself, and using AI for creative things like art or videos is a fun novelty, but isn’t something that you’re doing regularly and so your phone trying to promote apps that you only want to use once in a blue moon is annoying. If AI were actually so useful you could query it with anything and 99.999% of the time get back exactly what you wanted, AI would absolutely become much more useful.