Híbridos ou centauros

A velha ideia do híbrido, para a qual Kasparov me alertou.

Seth Godin chama-lhe centauro:

"Freelancers looking to build a career have two good options:

1. Be so good at doing the work by hand that you're a better alternative for a client than using Al. This is going to get more and more difficult.

2. Be so good at having Al work for you that you're the obvious choice when there's work to be done.

The lousy options are to insist that you don't use Al, but to be slower, more expensive and not as good as the Al option.

Or to do tasks that an Al assigns you.

Hiring an Al to work for you and getting very good at producing value feels like the future for most programmers, creators, business development folks and marketers."

A afirmação de Kasparov sobre xadrez sugere que a combinação de um ser humano (mesmo mediano) com uma ferramenta digital adequada (mesmo que mediana) consegue superar consistentemente a pura força bruta de um supercomputador sozinho. A inteligência humana acrescenta flexibilidade, criatividade e intuição que complementam a capacidade analítica e a velocidade do computador. Nunca esqueço MacGyver acerca de Sandy:

"MacGyver: Well, old Sandy sure has a mind of her own, doesn't she? Jill: Yes, but she thinks like me. So I should be able to think it through and find her pattern, logically and rationally.

MacGyver: Without the emotion, right?

Jill: That's what gives her the edge. People and emotion can't get in her way.

MacGyver: Well, I say we trust our instincts-go with our gut. You can't program that. That's our edge."

Do mesmo modo, o texto sobre freelancers e Inteligência Artificial de Seth Godin afirma que o futuro não é competir contra a máquina directamente (onde se perde quase sempre), mas sim usar a máquina como ferramenta colaborativa, criando uma equipa híbrida humano- IA que supera claramente qualquer um dos dois isoladamente.

Em suma, ambas as afirmações convergem na ideia de que a combinação inteligente e colaborativa entre humano e tecnologia supera, consistentemente, soluções puramente humanas ou puramente tecnológicas. Esta parece ser a estratégia vencedora para o futuro. 

Curiosidade do dia

Um artigo super interessante noo FT de hoje, "Students must learn to be more than mindless 'machine-minders'".

Eu uso a inteligência artificial todos os dias no meu trabalho. E interrogo-me muitas vezes sobre o impacte do seu uso na minha capacidade futura de pensar criticamente sobre os assuntos. Também sei que há temas em que a inteligência artificial é propícia a erros de interpretação e, por isso, é perigoso aceitar acriticamente o que nos diz.

"A survey of UK undergraduates by the Higher Education Policy Institute thinks shows 92 per cent of them are using generative Al in some form this year compared with 66 per cent last year, while 88 per cent have used it in assessments, up from 53 per cent last year." [Moi ici: Interessante como a autora propõe uma série de medidas criativas para enfrentar o problema para depois perceber que na prática não resultam porque já foram testadas em Cambridge]

...

"Maria Abreu, a professor of economic geography at Cambridge university, told me her department had experimented along these lines. But when they gave undergraduates an AI text and asked them to improve it, the results were disappointing. 'The improvements were very cosmetic, they didn’t change the structure of the arguments,' she said."

...

Michael Veale, an associate professor at University College London's law faculty, told me his department had returned to using more traditional exams, too. Veale, who is an expert on technology policy, sees Al as a 'threat to the learning process' because it offers an alluring short-cut to students who are pressed for time and anxious to get good marks. "We're worried. Our role is to warn them of these short-cuts - shortcuts that limit their potential. We want them to be using the best tools for the job in the workplace when the time comes, but there's a time for that, and that time isn't always at the beginning," he says."

...

"The researchers concluded that 'a focus on maintaining foundational skills in information gathering and problem-solving would help workers avoid becoming overreliant on Al'. In other words, to use the short-cut effectively rather than mindlessly, you need to know how to do it without the short-cut."

Há dias conversava com a minha mãe, professora reformada, sobre a necessidade de se pensar o que se deve ensinar nas escolas. Conversa motivada pelo comentário de alguém que trabalhou na China e me despertou para o tema de como é que uma máquina de escrever é usada na China que tem dezenas de milhares de caracteres.  

A autora escreve, e bem:

"After all, your students' prospects in the world of work are going to depend on how much value they can add, over and above what a machine can spit out."

Em linha com o que ouvi há dias na net:

“The only comparative advantage I have against AI is a soul. And I think we're gonna have to really lean into that a lot more.” —Ron Baker @nerdenterprises #AskTSOE @ronaldbaker @edkless

— The Soul of Enterprise (@asktsoe) February 28, 2025