• zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    If we’re making up numbers my point is that with 100 employees using AI you get 2x the quality than 50 employees using AI

    • TheMightyCat@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m making up numbers because I don’t have the actual numbers and 2x is easy for the example, insert whatever numbers you like.

      The issue with that statement is that putting double the employees on a project doesn’t always improve its quality.

      If we go with the numbers we have been going with and a employee with AI is twice as productive then adding AI effectively doubles the time available. This only leads to a quality increase if work was being cut short. If each employee already got the required time necessary to handle a application with full quality then you haven’t increased quality but the capacity. If the now increased capacity is far above normal volume it is a waste to have so much excess capacity.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Hardly, you need to maintain the same numbers to double check the work of AI. Haven’t improved throughput, but this guarantees better quality

        • TheMightyCat@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          If we accept that employees spend the same amount of time as without AI but now the error rate is reduced then yes. I don’t think that is the case but I don’t have the numbers so who knows.