9 ms·

>Every child will have an AI tutor that is infinitely patient, infinitely compassionate, infinitely knowledgeable, infinitely helpful. The AI tutor will be by e

• atleastoptimal 3y ago
  There are more risks from flawed teachers than risks from too perfect teachers
  • fsflover 3y ago
    Except that AI teachers trained by for-profit corporations are far from perfect.
    • pelagicAustral 3y ago
      Oh let me fix that business model right away, the perfect version costs 100 bucks a month.
      • TeMPOraL 3y ago
        And it doubles down on being flawed, as people willing to pay those 100 bucks self-select as both gullible and having discretionary income. More-less the same story as with paying for ad-free versions of ad-supported services.
      • sebzim4500 3y ago
        If it was truly that cheap it would fundamentally change society. Unless the field is incredibly competitive though it will cost orders of magnitude more than this.
    • thethethethe 3y ago
      Regular teachers are trained by for profit corporations too. They are called private universities
      • BeetleB 3y ago
        In the US, most accredited private universities are non-profits.
        • thethethethe 3y ago
          "Among postsecondary Title IV institutions in 2020–21, there were 1,892 public institutions, 1,754 private nonprofit institutions, and 2,270 private for-profit institutions." https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=1122#:~:text=Among%20postsecondary%20Title%20IV%20institutions,2%2C270%20private%20for%2Dprofit%20institutions https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=1122#:~:text=Am....
          • BeetleB 3y ago
            How many of those 2270 private for profit institutions are accredited?
• soco 3y ago
  Since when was something advertised as "perfect", perfect? I'd rather worry that it will be imperfect and try to teach all kind of random weird stuff to gullible kids.
• lisasays 3y ago
  Bothersome is an understatement. This is snake oil of the most insidious kind. Oh wait, here's another zinger: "I even think AI is going to improve warfare, when it has to happen, by reducing wartime death rates dramatically."
  • golergka 3y ago
    This is true though. Modern warfare became much less deadly to civilians. Just compare Russia's total brutal destruction of Mariupol with their barbaric indiscriminating artillery barrages and Ukraine's almost bloodless liberation of Kherson, without a single artillery or air strike on the city itself — a very clear contrast between 20th and 21st century's warfare. Wars will never go away, but by making them more precise and intelligent, we can make them not as horrible as they were in the past.
    • ornornor 3y ago
      I’ll preface this by saying that I have never known war in my lifetime and that I absolutely don’t condone it. That said, isn’t the point of war also that it’s horrible and barbaric? If war isn’t that anymore, won’t it be much more frequent and casually started as a result? Again, I’m absolutely not saying it’s a good thing that war maims and kills people, but I see these side effects as a deterrent. There is a component of terror to it and that’s what makes it even worse. If it’s enlisted professional killing each other, or even robots destroying each other, it can go on for much longer. And how do you determine the “winner” in that case if you can keep feeding robots into the fight, it’s never ending I’d think.
      • lisasays 3y ago
        That said, isn’t the point of war also that it’s horrible and barbaric? Of course - that's precisely the point. The idea that any technical innovation can make it less so (or make war less likely) runs counter to all historical observation.
        • InexSquirrel 3y ago
• TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
  Why not replace imperfect parents too? If AI can be a perfect tutor, it can certainly be a perfect parent, perfect romantic partner, perfect employee, perfect employer, perfect VC... In fact why not create a perfect economy, perfect media, and a perfect infinitely wise and knowledgable political system?
  • Ekaros 3y ago
    And in the end why not just replace the citizenry and voters... We could lock up those imperfect humans and just occasionally ship them some food and water. Maybe direct them to not produce so many imperfect new humans too.
    • JohnFen 3y ago
      What he said is not very far from that.
  • moffkalast 3y ago
    Actually unironically yes. If history's proven anything it's that if you put enough humans together we'll do almost nothing but invent more and more elaborate ways to kill each other. And sometimes to kill other things too.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • AllegedAlec 3y ago
    All hail the evitable conflict we're hurling ourselves towards.
• eastbound 3y ago
  > churning out the same cookie cutter individuals The question is not how to create individuals with different mind, but how to create them in enough mass that it reaches 51% before governments forbid whatever you are doing. And if you have so much power that the government doesn’t come at you, what kind of power were you looking for.
• dinvlad 3y ago
  They were trained by cheap labor in African countries, using abusive practices with no consideration for ethical concerns. The worst part is they didn't even care about how this would be seen by the public, since the public is just so blindingly hyped on it.
  • x11antiek 3y ago
    Do you have a smartphone? Pretty sure it was assembled by cheap labor in third-world countries using abusive practices with no consideration for ethical concerns. Maybe you have a laptop? Same story. Did you consider this before purchasing and using these devices?
    • crabmusket 3y ago
      It doesn't seem helpful to try to impugn a person's morals in an effort to discredit a valid concern. (And I say this as someone who does think about electronics supply chains, has previously owned a Fairphone and since has only purchased second-hand phones.)
      • x11antiek 3y ago
        It's not helpful neither fair to attach systemic issues of capitalism to the novel technology you personally don't like. Yes this is a valid concern. Yet it's about the same as jumping on a random person in the grocery store with a lecture about the unsustainability of the product that person is taking off the shelf. Sadly, buying second-hand devices for personal use won't affect these issues of the economic system we live in. I am making no statements about anyone's morals.
        • crabmusket 3y ago
          This isn't a grocery store, it's a comment threat incited by a highly positive take on AI. I think that's an appropriate place to mention these issues.
          • 3y ago
• throw310822 3y ago
  > Every child will have an AI tutor that is infinitely patient, infinitely compassionate, infinitely knowledgeable, infinitely helpful. Which also means: infinitely capable of performing a job in their place. What will these children study for? Teachers have always transmitted to the only available recipients the knowledge that otherwise would have disappeared with them. When intelligent beings can simply be replicated at zero cost and have no expiration, what are children even learning for?
  • amelius 3y ago
    They learn how to maximize their happiness.
  • briHass 3y ago
    Because, at least for many, the desire to learn is hardwired and gives us an immense feeling of satisfaction and pleasure. I read/study/try many things that have no (or negative) material value and are done far better and more efficiently by someone else or by a mechanical/electronic device. Chess, for example, seems to still be pretty popular even though even the best grand masters can be easily trounced by a computer.
    • wilg 3y ago
      In my opinion, you can view (nearly?) everything humans to as a desire to learn
    • BizarreByte 3y ago
      I have been around enough humans to know this is naive. There are so, so many humans who want nothing more than to laze around and indulge in vices while generally being completely useless. You don't have to look very hard to find them and I really believe this world become the norm if people weren't required to work and thus got no real reward for their efforts.
      • robocat 3y ago
        > who want nothing more than to laze around and indulge in vices Or is that the effect of poor-stimulation environments? Like the study that showed teenage drinking plummeted[1] in Iceland when teenagers were given stimulating activities to do instead. Anecdotally, I mostly drink when I’m bored, and I don’t drink when I am doing interesting things. [1] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=iceland+teenage+drinking+sports https://duckduckgo.com/?q=iceland+teenage+drinking+sports It was a variety of programs including a curfew for teenagers, but one leg of the programs was “Through the program, the municipalities funded and expanded after-school activities, from sports to gymnastics, to music, art, and ballet. The basic idea is to keep kids busy – and out of trouble – and help them find meaning in their lives that dissuades them from seeking alcohol or drugs in the first place.”. The nighttime curfew wouldn’t have prevented drinking during daytime or evenings, which reduced.
• GCA10 3y ago
  Amen on the value of imperfect tutors. I'd say that the best moments of early adolescence come when you dispute something with an adult -- and are able to establish they they're wrong and you're right. Later on, we have to learn how to do this delicately enough that we don't make enemies. But the journey to adulthood takes a big step forward during those early rushes of realizing that we can see/recognize things that our elders cannot.
• Karrot_Kream 3y ago
  > Who trains these AI tutors and how do we prevent the system they're embedded in from churning out the same cookie cutter individuals, each with the exact same political beliefs and inability to comprehend the grey and nuanced? I understand you're trying to dig into some idea of political homogenization and bias by pushing this point but I really think you're missing the forest for the trees. I grew up in a low income area in the US and the standard of public education was abysmal. The teachers were overworked with huge class sizes and they spent so much time helping kids simply graduate that they had no time to help any student who was average or above. If you learned in a non-standard way, forget about it. Forget "cookie cutter individuals", half the time the teachers would show up and not actually teach (they'd put some music on and work on other things.) "perfect tutors"? In an era before digitized gradebooks, teachers could give you whatever scores they wished, no accountability. One big function of standardized testing is to push teachers to be accountable. Even the teachers that were trying their best just didn't have the time to do any more than the absolute basics. I studied for SATs and AP exams by downloading textbooks from filesharing websites and studying those. Wikipedia filled in the gaps for non-STEM subjects. Nobody at my school could help me. At the time all the teachers and councilors knew is that I was going to be okay without any help from them, at least better than the other kids. I knew that nobody succeeded where I grew up and I needed to look outside to level myself up to succeed. I can only see AI tutors as much better than the nothing that often is public education. The status quo is just overworked, ineffective teaching. Being able to bounce off questions from an AI tutor when it's late and you're up with homework and your parents either can't help or are hostile to your educational goals (the reality in a low income area) would go a long way. Of course the reality is that maybe AI tutors aren't actually coming and all we'll get are LLMs trained on the contents of school textbooks, but even that is a lot better than what we have now. The important problem will be making sure that everyone gets access to these AI tutors and not just the privileged in the elite schools who were going to be funneled into an elite college anyway. Would it be best if we were able to shrink class sizes and have world-class teachers for children? Of course. Are countries going to be willing to pay the tax burden needed to make this happen? Probably not. In the meantime it's best for the poor kids to have the cookie-cutter, AI tutor while the wealthy have their own private tutors. It's not very different from the status quo today except the poor kids have nothing.
• JohnFen 3y ago
  That was a deeply disturbing part. Especially "[...]with the machine version of infinite love." It was very hard to keep reading after that maximal bit of creepy delusion.
• _-____-_ 3y ago
  I think it's much simpler than this. Either you're an autodidact or you're not. Children who are predisposed to teaching themselves stuff will now have more tools to help them learn what they want to learn.
  • wil421 3y ago
    When I learned through Encyclopedias and later from CD-ROM based formats like Microsoft encarta or The Way Things Work there were actually people creating the chapters. Later Wikipedia came about and spun up its own flavor of community based information, however flawed, there’s still a person curating information. Now there’s this AI who can spit out information with the hubris of Harvard professor. The language model has no idea if it’s correct or not and there no one curating answers. No one can explain how it came up with the answer but it’s correct in a lot of cases.
    • _-____-_ 3y ago
      I don't think there's a big issue with an unreliable tutor; a Harvard professor can spit out incorrect information, too. It's up to the learner to cross-check and verify the information. If you're uncritically ingesting facts from some other intelligence (artificial or otherwise), you won't be learning much anyway. The best lessons come when you make connections between different bits of information, so if an unreliable tutor forces you to make more of those connections in the process of checking its work, so be it.
• quickthrower2 3y ago
  m3gan film is based on this idea
• throwaway675309 3y ago
  "The AI tutor will be by each child’s side every step of their development, helping them maximize their potential with the machine version of infinite love." Somebody clearly took a lot from the scene in Terminator 2 with John Connor trying to teach Arnold how to do a high five.
• parentheses 3y ago
  Where will the hard knocks come from? I don't necessarily like the idea of paying for AI to train my children to be AI dependent life long children who spent their whole life around benevolent AIs. That said to move up the stack, the point is to paint a generally rosy picture. Not tell us that our kids will be raised by AI to be part of the futures uniform culture.
• JKCalhoun 3y ago
  First thought, oh, so he's been reading Neal Stephenson lately.
• bko 3y ago
  Whats the alternative? A lot of kids are left behind in the current education system. It happens on both ends. Kids that don't get it just get pushed through the system. That's why you have schools with <20% reading proficiency and <50% math proficiency but >95% graduation rates [0]. Do you think an 10th grade English teacher is going to stop his class to teach kids how to read? It happens on the upper end of course and smart kids end up building bombs because they're bored [1] AI tutors would be a huge benefit and allow people to explore the topics they're interested. Maybe a kid isn't so interested in historical battles but is more interested in the clothing people wore at the time. Or someone else might be interested in something completely different. The breadth of LLMs is a real killer feature for creativity and exploration. I think this would result in the opposite of cookie cutter as the current system where 30 kids sit in a room and study the same thing produces cookie cutter individuals, albeit extremely poorly as many don't learn anything [0] https://www.publicschoolreview.com/hoboken-high-school-profile https://www.publicschoolreview.com/hoboken-high-school-profi... [1] https://nextshark.com/steve-wozniak-fake-bomb-ahmed-mohamed https://nextshark.com/steve-wozniak-fake-bomb-ahmed-mohamed
• bbor 3y ago
  A) no one (sane) is recommending that we don't have teachers. I suppose you didn't grow up around those with wealth, who give their children massive advantages with focused, targeted, extensive 1:1 tutoring. B) Who trains the human teachers? I don't think I need to cite any sources for the claim that many, many people in our society are already concerned about excessive uniformity and political brainwashing in our schools. I mean, just look to the nature of religious education in most of U.S. as a perfect example of completely AI-free objective brainwashing.
• crazygringo 3y ago
  > how do we prevent the system they're embedded in from churning out the same cookie cutter individuals Everybody's already so crazy different, both from genetics and from family influence, there's no need to worry. There's so much diversity in people. > each with the exact same political beliefs and inability to comprehend the grey and nuanced? Education (at least in the US and Europe) is usually about teaching critical thinking, not political indoctrination. Why do you think tutors would change this? (Teaching political science, for example, is very likely to reduce your strongly-held political beliefs and lead you to see things as much more gray and nuanced.) > Do we even want perfect tutors at all? There's no such thing as perfect. All it said was infinitely patient, infinitely knowledgeable, etc. Computers are already infinitely patient, and even just Wikipedia alone is getting qualitatively similar to inifinitely knowledgeable.