There are multiple lawsuits, and settlements are already in with some property managers. Yieldstar/RealPage are not the only culprits, either: https://imgur.com/a/EmJQryv
not sure what this sort of naval gazing accomplishes. software companies are designing their products around user preferences. you or anyone else are welcome to create the kind of software you think we "should" have, but if it doesn't line up with the revealed preferences of the users then I'm not sure what the point is
Agreed, blind people and sighted people are able to experience different kinds of beauty that are inaccessible to each other. As a sighted person, if there was a technology that could describe the beauty that a blind person experiences in a given moment I would think that would be pretty cool to try.
> Please, don't hype accessibility just for your personal fun. There are people out there with real problems, and dangling impossible solutions before their "eyes" is pretty much cruel
Do you think it's going to be impossible forever? bandwidth and latency seem like the surest things to improve in AI tech
I don't know about bandwidth from device to brain. Maybe Neuralink or something similar?
It has been tried a lot. I saw the first sonar-alike navigation aid in the early 90s. It basically translated detected obstacles into vibration. Thats where you start to realize that bandwidth is the issue. Because a single, or maybe even a group of, vibrations, doesn't really tell you anything about the nature of the obstacle.
Now, we're at a point where vision models (if they dont hallucinate, DANGER!!!) can actually destinguish different obstacles and even describe them. Nice. However, you're pretty much limited to speech synthesis as an information channel. That is not that bad, but very distracting when you move about outside. After all, blind people already use their ears to learn about their surroundings. There isn't much, if any, bandwidth left to stick some constantly chatting voice in. You end up deminishing your actual senses input about the surroundings, which is also dangerous. Nothing beats the turn-around time of your own ears or tactile info you might get from your cane...
So, to answer your question: Maybe. I haven't seen a technology that can squeeze some more bandwidth out of the current situation yet.
The thesis is simple: these programs are smart now, but unreliable when executing complex, multi-step tasks. If that improves (whether because the models get so smart that they never make a mistake in the first place, or because they get good enough at checking their work and correcting it), we can give them control over a computer and run them in a loop in order to function as drop-in remote workers.
The economic growth would then come from every business having access to a limitless supply of tireless, cheap, highly intelligent knowledge workers
I agree that it is that "simple." What I worry about, aside from mass unemployment, is the C Suite buying into these tools before they are actually good enough. This seems inevitable.
