upvote

points

by jscd3 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby pixl973 hours ago|
next
[-]
You're honest, but you'd make a terrible CEO in this day and age.
reply
upvoteby bigfishrunning2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Those two qualities tend to go hand in hand
reply
upvoteby ModernMech3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
What about a director of a movie. They aren't responsible for the creative performances but they are certainly given a heap of credit for having made the movie.

I ask 10 actors for 10 scenes and I combine them into a movie I wanted.

I ask 10 agents for 10 functions and I combine them into a program I wanted.

What's the difference and why is the guy who used agents not credited the same way as a director? Maybe all that's missing is a long list of credits for everyone involved -- so transparency in who did what?

reply
upvoteby geodel1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
10 agents for 10 function sounds like IT director. I see enterprises are full of those and they are getting credited appropriately for "AI led innovation" at workplace.

The difference with Movie director at least is in details. IT director most likely does not care about Python, bash, js, mermaid, performance characteristics and so many other things that AI agent might have used to solve the problem. The user of these AI innovation are not having much say. They are not going to be voting with their wallet or feet.

For movie director the details of process matters a lot. Unless of course I am shooting 2 min video on my Motorola phone, while my kid is cutting her birthday cake, and call myself a movie director while doing it.

reply