Jim Kwik

Oh, these are all going to be really close.

I'm very pro-human, so I think a lot of these things are that way.

Because still, they're chess players that are beating AI.

I would go human.

AI analyzes.

Okay, so it depends how you were defining the thing.

AI analyzes better than humans, but I think humans discern meaning.

I would skew it more human.

Ooh, AI stores more information.

No competition there's.

So I would have to give it to AI.

Humans remember things that matter, especially emotionally, but there's definitely going to be some kind of ceiling.

I would have to give it to AI.

Humans are great pattern recognizers, but AI can analyze things in much more data than humans can.

That I would give to humans.

I think this is where a lot of breakthroughs come from.

Cross-domain, looking at things from different verticals, I would give that more of a human quality.

Imagination and intuition, I would give human.

AI can remix things that already exist, but humans could create new.

Even for intuition, I think humans always, you know, wisdom is encoded into our being more instinctual.