Most user interfaces already have a much finer granularity and number of options than your examples.
When taking a shower, I would like fine control over the water temperature, preferably with a feedback loop regulating the temperature. (Preferably also the regulation changes over the duration of the showering.)
Choosing to read the NY times indeed is only a few taps away, but navigating through and within its list of articles is nowadays done quite fast and intuitively thanks to quite a lot of UI advancements.
My point being, short sequences are a very limited set within a vast UI space.
People go for convenience and speed, oftentimes even if there's some accuracy cost. AI fulfills this preference, especially because it can learn on the go.
> When taking a shower, I would like fine control over the water temperature, preferably with a feedback loop regulating the temperature. (Preferably also the regulation changes over the duration of the showering.)
That exists, but it’s expensive because of the electronics and mechanics involved. There are so many interfaces with this exact problem.
You also almost certainly don’t want non-deterministic hallucination prone AI controlling physical systems.
Indeed, and to take the UI a step further, humans often prefer automation, if it works reliable. A complicated UI would become simple, just step into the shower.
There’s no complicated UI. You just turn a knob that sets a digital temperature readout.
If you want the shower to save your temperature preferences and start automatically, there’s no reason to build in a computer capable of running an AI.
But in reality you almost certainly don’t want a system like this because you don’t want an AI accidentally turning on your shower when you’re not home, when you do ok to clean it, or grab a razor, or when your toddler wanders in.
Granted an AI could try to determine intent, but it’s never going to get it 100% right. Which is why for physical systems like this you almost always want a physical button to signal intent.
It would become less expensive, using less sensors and actuators, when using the predictive and learning abilities of an ai. You can, for safety reasons, keep a mechanical temperature limiter in the loop.
Temperature can be measured in different ways. IR radiation and sound can be measured from a distance. The relationship between temperature at the source, of the water exiting the showerhead and time can be learned. Water can be heated in different ways. The valve could also be a pump. Our reaction to the temperature of the water can be sensed.
Who knows, AI can come up with simpler or cheaper solutions that did not cross our mind.
I would say, time will tell.
Prompt engineering and using multiple AI models in parallel might find ways to cancel out most hallucinations similar to how consensus-based replication works.
It might. If hallucinations are truly random and not correlated to anything shared between models. For example, something inherent to the data they are trained on. Given how locked down I think potential training data is going to become, and the amount of data required, I think that sharing data between models is almost guaranteed.
Also that sounds like an awful lot of computing power for everyday UIs. It also doesn’t solve the non determinism problem.
When taking a shower, I would like fine control over the water temperature, preferably with a feedback loop regulating the temperature. (Preferably also the regulation changes over the duration of the showering.)
Choosing to read the NY times indeed is only a few taps away, but navigating through and within its list of articles is nowadays done quite fast and intuitively thanks to quite a lot of UI advancements.
My point being, short sequences are a very limited set within a vast UI space.
People go for convenience and speed, oftentimes even if there's some accuracy cost. AI fulfills this preference, especially because it can learn on the go.