I think H is always the same. In fact, H is a human, so it doesn’t make any sense to have code of the form H←x. In every step, a new system A(t+1) is trained by letting a regular human oversee it, where the human has access to the system A(t).
Conversely, your code would imply that the human itself is replaced with something, and that thing then uses the system A(t). This does not happen.
(Unless my understanding is widely off; I’m only reading this sequence for the second time.)
I think H is always the same. In fact, H is a human, so it doesn’t make any sense to have code of the form H←x. In every step, a new system A(t+1) is trained by letting a regular human oversee it, where the human has access to the system A(t).
Conversely, your code would imply that the human itself is replaced with something, and that thing then uses the system A(t). This does not happen.
(Unless my understanding is widely off; I’m only reading this sequence for the second time.)