The argument here, stated about half way through the post, is that "when content becomes abundant, judgment becomes scarce." So "that is where learning professionals can bring more value." Let's think about that. A while ago I proposed a type of AI, called "deontic analytics", would decide what is worthwhile, what is valuable, what should be done. I've seen nothing that suggests AI will be incapable of this. Why would we trust human judgement over AI, if AI can be demonstrably better at this? Consider the new decision models, like Jev and Clef and Decision 1.0 (I'll be a human named that one). It's not obvious that human judgement will always be better. Image: Shadhin.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
