Remember that time, when the only source of information we had were books and interactive closed groups such as that of schools, family, friends and workplace. And nobody bothered much about the tech-advancements. Imagine you are sitting with group of people and suddenly someone asks you about a cool smartphone that doesn't have a keypad, or you don't know why the american president's called an idiot. Now if you have a smartphone already, you'd just ask siri or alexa to answer for you. But that's just as primitive as using old hand tools. A gun would only kill someone if a human presses the trigger. In fact the machines or gadgets we use only do things that they are told to. Although they evolve, but that's just feeding in data with no opinionated judgments for you. It's like a creative field, you need to absorb more data through lifestyle experience for you to have a artistic output, mostly better than what is already being used. Machines still need people to operate, someone to nudge them, someone to tell them what to do. Macintosh still comes with rudimentary two input devices without which they are useless. 911 still have people sitting to answer calls and send emergency outputs.
So, a computer works in permutation and combination algorithms to analyse what is being fed in, to bring out best possible outcomes - no matter what the consequence be. On the other hand a human would analyse problems differently through their past experiences and provide results which are either widely accepted or is best in his opinion - aligning with the cause and effect of the solution.
Computers can now generate and come up with own solutions gauging all the sequential outcomes to our well defined problems. Yet, they are far towards being intuitive. They still have to start things from the basic, for example, you can ask siri different questions but would be unable to form conversation that it may have learnt from past experience. Unlike your dog. At least he knows when you are going to take him for a walk. A household robot would not know when it is time for a walk unless their owner set in an alarm or raise a gesture.
Only difference we have is our nervous system that gets intuitions to reality. Humans are good at awareness, perception and decision making. While robots, precision and repetitiveness. Therefore, there isn't any question that robots would take on the world and they would still need humans to control them. These days, organisations are advertising and marketing stuff to people who don't need. And man, they're doing well. However they shall begin making products that people want.
So, what do you get when you give a design tool a digital nervous system? Computers that can connect with humans to improve our ability to think and imagine, and robotic systems that come up with (and build) radical new designs for bridges, cars, drones and much more -- all by themselves.
An experiment done for Bandito Bros racing cars, where scientists put sensors throughout the car chassis, giving it a nervous system and drove around the desert for a week. These sensors eventually record pressure on the joints, acceleration, breaking, etc. Finally, it recorded more than 4 billion data pointers to be fed into AI-generative design tool to fabricate the same chassis but with perfection. A car chassis that a human could never have designed. Except in this case, it had human intervention throughout the process.
Intuitions led generative augmented reality is here and humanly possible.
To see the full experiment article - https://www.fastcompany.com/3054028/inside-the-hack-rod-the-worlds-first-ai-designed-car