What makes human oversight of AI useful?
One post argues that human involvement is becoming optional for a growing set of AI tasks, asking when judgment helps and when an approval button merely makes people feel useful.
TLDR
A user argues that human intervention can sometimes slow AI models down, then asks where people genuinely add value: supplying missing context, deciding what is worth doing or taking responsibility for outcomes. The post questions the reassurance of keeping a human in the loop: does the reviewer have enough information, time and ability to change the result? It also distinguishes completing a task well from choosing a worthwhile task.
Combined views
—
1 Source, first seen ago
