Filters are better than agents.

· Bits and Bobs 1/21/25
  • Filters are better than agents[agw][agx].
    • Agents take actions on your behalf.
      • They might take the wrong action, causing difficult-to-reverse downside.
      • Dangerous!
    • Filters[agy] help sort information and make recommendations.
      • The end user decides whether to act or not.
      • Having the user in the loop provides a check, preventing unexpected downside.
    • Filters, if they're not perfect, don't hurt.
      • But if it's great, it can give recommendations that are game-changing for a user.
      • Capped downside, uncapped upside.
    • Agents, if they're not perfect, can do real damage.
      • Uncapped downside, uncapped upside.
    • Downside can lead to game over.
      • The user has such a bad experience they decide to never use it again.
      • Or the user literally goes bankrupt.
      • This makes downside more dangerous than upside is good.
    • To make agents safe requires significant, carefully controlled guardrails.
      • This is extremely hard in the limit.
      • You have to anticipate the unanticipatable.
      • The effort to define good guardrails could be much larger than the benefit of the things that could happen within the guardrails[agz].
      • More cost than value, no incentive to activate.

More on this topic

From other episodes