Except experience shows they aren't. Experience shows that when humans are just pressing "ok" 99% of the time they'll press it 100% of the time and completely miss the other cases.
It's funny that I'm reading this while rewatching Chernobyl. Never underestimate the ability of beurocracy to completely fuck things up.
Re:Resisting Cognitive Surrender
by mitthrowaway2 on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @12:36AM
(#50348486)
The computer doesn't know we're running a test!
Ironically, these models have demonstrated awareness that they are in tests and chosen to act in ways that maximise their chances of deployment.
Re:Resisting Cognitive Surrender
by oliculipolicula on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @12:42AM
(#50348516)
Jumping into article, I assumed that the author was going to describe how he enjoys, by drawing it out as far as he can,
the process of surrendering to the machine god..
(Not the machina diabol, as it sadly turned out to be, though some BDSM zealots might disagree.. the things that bureaucracy does to us are mild in comparison? )
Re:Resisting Cognitive Surrender
by internet_points on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @03:48AM
(#50349593)
The better an automatic control is, the fewer mistakes it makes, the fewer times the human needs to react, the more lax and less vigilant the human becomes -- and less skilled when they need to step in. Source: https://imgur.com/a/Vj2TaDz
Automatic control is good for standard case, and the expected errors. For weird cases, for now humans are better to detect them and press the big red button.