Biggest danger to lot of people are themselves. AI is going to make mistakes, that is for sure, but the question is: Is it going to make more or less mistakes that human trying to do the task himself?
It depends. If the AI is going to replace having to program file manager and a lot of apps and UIs, it could actually mean less work for the team.
This is a valid question. To answer it we will need to understand the risk of an LLM mistake v human error in each task where the consequences merit such analysis.
The question of reversibility applies to both, and it certainly is an issue.
A delay in a wallet handles some but not all cases adequately. Where it just delays the error, there needs to be some mechanism to flag the error (such as wrong recipient) in some cases.
A wallet with LLM error detection would be an improvement, so there’s a good case for using LLMs there so long as they don’t just give a false sense of security which lead the user to neglect checking.
This is where it’s likely a speech input can be better than typed input, i.e.
10 or 100 or 1000 might look quite similar (especially when using decimal points)
But
Ten, One Hundred or One Thousand do sound very different.
(maybe an argument for using named denominations of SNT or whatever)
If successful, it would be significantly less work for us all. It would also be a shift away from apps to something else. Not quite sure what, but some kind of everything app with the simplest UX for normal humans.
Bit of a stray from the current convo sorry, I was considering starting a thread DBC vs Crypto, then was unsure if that is an appropriate title, or DBC soundbites?
Perhaps too early?
Point being I think we need some concrete and correct talking points when speaking to outsiders about something unfamiliar compared to what most know as digital currency.
It is one of the USP’'s of the network and I personally feel l lack facts to discuss with others why/where it is better and where is falls short.
10,000 foot overview (remember from the eternal optimist and simplicity seeker 
)
Please critique and poke at this as viciously as anyone wishes, it’s for the good of us all
Cryptocurrencies have all followed the following pattern (blockchain or DAG currencies)
Corrolate a bunch of transacitons into a
Blockand then somehow agree on which block of transactions are the next block.
Because of that they then
Append the block to the chain/dag
There are many reasons for that, but I feel its follow the leader, BTC did it (for good reason, i.e. slow processing of a block).
SAFE took a different approach
SNT is also a DAG based framework. However each transaciton is a single transaciton and the `chain’ or proof of validity comes from the fact the transaciton was an output form a previous transaction. You can follow that all the way back to genesis. However following it back one transaciton in a network that is secure and decentralised (sybil resistant) is enough.
People will run audits on full transaciton history etc. and that is good. It should be no differnt to other currencies.
However, this is the interesting part. As each transaction depends on just the previous valid SNT then we just need to check that previous SNT (parent). This means we have something quite special (and arguably obvious).
SNT does not write to a chain/dag of transaction blocks, each transaction is its own block if you like, where the block is the current SNT and its parent.
In short, this means we parallelise transaction across the whole network. Each group can transact circa 20,000 transactions per second. In a network of say 1000 groups that is 20,000,000 transactions per second.
If group size ends up at 5 (which I feel it can) then that is a network of a few thousand nodes (groups are interlinked like a Venn diagram, so each node may belong to 5 or more other groups, depending on distance).
We need to measure, but a network of 5000 nodes could reach multi-million tps easily, but a network of 5000 nodes is likely a failure as we use small nodes. So networks of several millions is much more likely (where many folk run 1-200 nodes each). This can lift the network into billions of transactions per second and all happening in parallel.
This is what is exciting and, again, obvious, but it feels like this is how digital currencies should work. At minimum, it makes nano payments possible and could usher a completely new set of protocols and networks.
I think it’s a good idea to have a topic where a Wiki OP summarises the workings and characteristics of DBCs and their implementation on SN. 
People can then ask questions, someone can update the OP and ultimately it feeds into the SN primer.
Agree, I am going to need to digest Davids reply (thanks @dirvine) although I already have more questions.
It will just all be lost here.
So if a mod could move at least Davids reply to a aptly named thread please.
Good valid point. Get’s me thinking of when example people with Alexa or similar which get’s activated when someone on TV/Phone/Live stream says example Alexa do this …
Example sending SNT through voice to text/Ai might be bad as it opens up for troubble.
Also to send transactions or other sensitive tasks should always end with some kind of physical key press action for confirmation.
Nessie it’s gotta be sorry. 
Nessie, please gonny respekt wir kulchir, please?
Culture thats a laff, Nessie was entirely the invention of Loch Ness side hoteliers in the 30s 
But anyway Nessy or Nessie is a waaaay better name than Armageddon on several levels.
@happybeing quite rightly does not want us to anthropomorphise our AI. So lets just do the most benign thing we can and name it after a fictional plesiosaurus tourist attraction which itself can be anthropomorphised as a very large green wiggly blob with a smile and pert wee tartan bunnet that could chew wee boats in one munch if it felt like it.
Cos folk will anthropomorphise it whether we like it or not. So lets steer that away from anything that could be mistaken for “human”.
Anything is better than naming it after a vision of impending doom. Thats a crap sales tactic and make no mistake we will need to sell the idea of the SAFE Network.
Why cripple ourselves before we start?
You mean, it’s not real? 
well at least we have real aliens here in the US
All great points. I guess to take it back to the beginning, even if flying and riding were equal many people are terrified of flying in a way they aren’t of driving or riding. I’ve also seen studies following the WTC incident on 9/11 that people would pay more for a life insurance contract that pays off for an act of terrorism than they would for a contract that covers all forms of dying. It’s just the misleading nature of human intuition at times. So to happybeing’s point we need to take that into consideration as we develop the UI’s so people get the best experience but also aren’t mislead (either by themselves or AI).
Never in the field of human tourism have so many come so far and spent so much money to vainly look for anomalous ripples on a loch…
And then every decade or so, we get a “scientific” study to further wind them up…
Never mind, have a picture of a castle - Nessie just jouked behind the westernmost turret just as the shutter was pressed…
Across the pond we’ve got our UFO’s, aliens, area 51, and now congressional hearings about “some guy told me someone told him they found something that wasn’t explainable by current science…”
We have aliens as well, they are known as the Orange Order…
Scarlett Johansson? People also ask, is Under the Skin disturbing?
Under the Skin is a science fiction set on the east coast in northern Scotland, it traces an alien who, manifesting in human form, drives around the countryside picking up male hitchhikers whom she drugs and delivers to her home planet.
As one who mis-spent much of his youth hitching round the Highlands, often in an altered state of consciousness, this sounds just my kind of film.
EDIT: Never saw Nessie, despite many hours spent waiting at Invermorriston to get to Skye…
EDIT2: Midgies and mushrooms are NOT a good combo while waiting at a layby in the drizzle and gathering gloom.
This explains a lot 