1657

Apparently a page from an internal IBM training manual. Some further attempts at source it

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] petrol_sniff_king 2 points 5 days ago

Imagine however, that a machine objectively makes the better decisions than any person.

You can't know if a decision is good or bad without a person to evaluate it. The situation you're describing isn't possible.

the people who deploy a machine [...] should be accountable for those actions.

How is this meaningfully different from just having them make the decisions in the first place? Are they too stupid?

[-] psud@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You can evaluate effectiveness by company profits. One program might manage a business well enough to steadily increase profit, another may make a sharp profit before profit crashes (maybe by firing important workers) . Investors will demand the best CEObots

Edit to add: of course any CEObot will be more sociopathic than any human CEO. They won't care about literally anything unless a score is attached to it

[-] petrol_sniff_king 1 points 10 hours ago

This... requires a person to look at the profit numbers. To care about them, even. I'm not really sure what you're getting at.

I think you're saying that computers can be very good at chess, but we are the ones who decide what the rules to chess are.

this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2025
1657 points (100.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

27214 readers
1746 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS