I meant root-wise - not instances. You work for the progress of civilization. And automated waste is like innocent or malicious waste: you will find it around in copious loads and you have to train the public to manage it.
> That's why we call it the devil's advocate: because nobody should
Actually, we must. You always perform checks to consider counterpoints. We did use dialectics in the context where the expression was born because that is correct heuristics. You do not decide about Attila the Hun (in our context - nor of Louis the Pious, in the historic context for the expression) just on the basis of current prejudice, of somehow consolidated fame. You are mandated to check whether you may be wrong, and you wonder so explicitly.
But this is relevant to real arguments. You are not supposed to expect the bot to say something with truth value or sharpness value. (And this remains the issue with said technology.)
I meant root-wise - not instances. You work for the progress of civilization. And automated waste is like innocent or malicious waste: you will find it around in copious loads and you have to train the public to manage it.
> That's why we call it the devil's advocate: because nobody should
Actually, we must. You always perform checks to consider counterpoints. We did use dialectics in the context where the expression was born because that is correct heuristics. You do not decide about Attila the Hun (in our context - nor of Louis the Pious, in the historic context for the expression) just on the basis of current prejudice, of somehow consolidated fame. You are mandated to check whether you may be wrong, and you wonder so explicitly.
But this is relevant to real arguments. You are not supposed to expect the bot to say something with truth value or sharpness value. (And this remains the issue with said technology.)