The “turning knobs on an oil rig” analogy is particularly unconvincing. Even a smart human can read the engineering schematics and infer what the knobs do without needing to be shown.
I can potentially see an argument about some mechanism that is more likely to be jury rigged off-spec in the field. Or a mechanism that is currently partially malfunctioning.
The best argument around implicit knowledge would be things like “Pure math research”. While it is easy enough to get the axioms of maths, it is harder to see how people search the space from videos etc. My best model for how this is transferred between people is that people learn from other people by attempting to do maths and then getting given feedback based upon their methodology and what their teachers think needs to change. So the teacher needs to be able to model the student somewhat so that they can give useful feedback and correct errors. If this is necessarily the case, then computers will need a lot of personal human input to get good at abstract reasoning.
I don’t think this is the necessarily the strongest argument.
The “turning knobs on an oil rig” analogy is particularly unconvincing. Even a smart human can read the engineering schematics and infer what the knobs do without needing to be shown.
I can potentially see an argument about some mechanism that is more likely to be jury rigged off-spec in the field. Or a mechanism that is currently partially malfunctioning.
The best argument around implicit knowledge would be things like “Pure math research”. While it is easy enough to get the axioms of maths, it is harder to see how people search the space from videos etc. My best model for how this is transferred between people is that people learn from other people by attempting to do maths and then getting given feedback based upon their methodology and what their teachers think needs to change. So the teacher needs to be able to model the student somewhat so that they can give useful feedback and correct errors. If this is necessarily the case, then computers will need a lot of personal human input to get good at abstract reasoning.
I don’t think this is the necessarily the strongest argument.