5 ms·

why is this surprising. all such tools hamper learning. if you want to learn, read books, read and write. don't use a spellchecker for ur language exam. no calc

why is this surprising. all such tools hamper learning. if you want to learn, read books, read and write. don't use a spellchecker for ur language exam. no calculator for calculus. pen and paper. how is this going backwards :(

dools 2y ago
I can report that I have learned more about bash scripting in the past couple of years using ChatGPT to write all manner of scripts, than I did in the previous 20 years of copying and pasting things off StackOverflow.
- JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B 2y ago
  You’re supposed to learn by reading books and doing exercises by yourself (https://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/ https://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/). SO is equivalent to ChatGPT and will teach you nothing deep.
  - dools 2y ago
    Disagree that it's the equivalent of SO. Unlike SO, I can ask it why it is doing something and as a result I can better understand what it writes, I can create little test cases, and make sure it's not going to do anything destructive or incorrect. Given the fact that I only ever write bash scripts when I need to "make computer do thing now now now now now" the likelihood that I would ever take the time to deeply learn the ins and outs of bash are slim to none. I can ask it to explain certain constructs and give me worked examples very quickly to improve my understanding. Even though I can't say I could reproduce all the various things that it has written for me, I know things that bash can do that I was never aware of before, and I can recognise lots of things in the syntax now that would previously have looked like gibberish.
  - HKH2 2y ago
    Yeah, we all learn exactly the same way. We're all great at reading books and following steps in the right order.
  - kamaal 2y ago
    The difference is you can't query or chat with a book. You can with a LLM. So if you are learning some thing new, you can keep poking and asking questions until you reach some level of understanding. Im guessing with a book a lot of that has to happen with yourself.
- horizon10 2y ago
  Agreed. I have learned more about AI using chatGPT compared to traditional stuff.
2muchcoffeeman 2y ago
As cool as AI is, the only thing it’s going to do is increase inequality. I bet all the wealthy and middle class parents with STEM background will get tutoring for their kids in the “old ways” knowing full well that the people who aren’t reliant on AI and can spot mistakes in output will now have a huge advantage in the workforce.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- kamaal 2y ago
  This can also back fire. I remember the days when people said programmers who don't use the internet/Google while coding actually learn more than those who do. While that was true initially- Eventually internet was just the norm and all pervasive. People who didn't use just got more unproductive, Same with companies. Sure grind on whatever you are learning, but don't equate suffering with making progress. After a while do use the tools, you won't be building anything worth while without them.
  - azemetre 2y ago
    This is an interesting thought. I learned programming thru a text editor vim. I didn’t have autocomplete and LSPs wouldn’t be invented until 8 years later. I wasn’t smart enough to figure out how to install/setup omnicomplete or snippets. All this meant I had to seek out the docs every time I wanted to use a method (or even be aware of an API), I had to write the same method every time. I’d like to think this paid off for me, when writing JS I have a good heuristic on what methods do what that was slowly developed over constant repetition. Now that I’m mentoring others I notice how others work with these modern editor features. It’s certainly faster than how I did it but I do wonder if there is a difference in aptitude. When I worked at my first large corporation there was a very intelligent dev. I noticed over time he never really looked up answers on stack overflow or random blogs. He always went straight to the docs and the source code itself. I like to think his method of deliberate slowdown has paid off massively, even the way he asks questions was better than the rest of us. It is hard to know which ways are better for learning and in the end we were all roughly making the same amount but there has to be something more to the usual pedagogy for software engineering. I do wonder if tools like autocomplete, myriad of internet answers or musings, and now LLMs may be a hindrance for initial learning but it’s always hard to make these arguments because we have the benefit of learned experience whereas the new generation are now using different tools than us yet still arrive at the same conclusions.
skittleson 2y ago
Agreed. I dont want kids to use this until they are much older... it's a crutch. They are not applying critical thinking skills when using a LLM. The value is when children try->fail->try->fail->try->succeed. It builds up problem-solve abilities.
jcims 2y ago
If your goal is passing a test or rushing through homework then yes. But if you’re actually curious about a topic and understand the limitations of LLMs and how to use prompt language you can actually learn quite a lot from them.

dools 2y ago

I can report that I have learned more about bash scripting in the past couple of years using ChatGPT to write all manner of scripts, than I did in the previous 20 years of copying and pasting things off StackOverflow.

JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B 2y ago
You’re supposed to learn by reading books and doing exercises by yourself (https://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/ https://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/). SO is equivalent to ChatGPT and will teach you nothing deep.
- dools 2y ago
  Disagree that it's the equivalent of SO. Unlike SO, I can ask it why it is doing something and as a result I can better understand what it writes, I can create little test cases, and make sure it's not going to do anything destructive or incorrect. Given the fact that I only ever write bash scripts when I need to "make computer do thing now now now now now" the likelihood that I would ever take the time to deeply learn the ins and outs of bash are slim to none. I can ask it to explain certain constructs and give me worked examples very quickly to improve my understanding. Even though I can't say I could reproduce all the various things that it has written for me, I know things that bash can do that I was never aware of before, and I can recognise lots of things in the syntax now that would previously have looked like gibberish.
- HKH2 2y ago
  Yeah, we all learn exactly the same way. We're all great at reading books and following steps in the right order.
- kamaal 2y ago
  The difference is you can't query or chat with a book. You can with a LLM. So if you are learning some thing new, you can keep poking and asking questions until you reach some level of understanding. Im guessing with a book a lot of that has to happen with yourself.
horizon10 2y ago
Agreed. I have learned more about AI using chatGPT compared to traditional stuff.

2muchcoffeeman 2y ago

As cool as AI is, the only thing it’s going to do is increase inequality. I bet all the wealthy and middle class parents with STEM background will get tutoring for their kids in the “old ways” knowing full well that the people who aren’t reliant on AI and can spot mistakes in output will now have a huge advantage in the workforce.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kamaal 2y ago
This can also back fire. I remember the days when people said programmers who don't use the internet/Google while coding actually learn more than those who do. While that was true initially- Eventually internet was just the norm and all pervasive. People who didn't use just got more unproductive, Same with companies. Sure grind on whatever you are learning, but don't equate suffering with making progress. After a while do use the tools, you won't be building anything worth while without them.
- azemetre 2y ago
  This is an interesting thought. I learned programming thru a text editor vim. I didn’t have autocomplete and LSPs wouldn’t be invented until 8 years later. I wasn’t smart enough to figure out how to install/setup omnicomplete or snippets. All this meant I had to seek out the docs every time I wanted to use a method (or even be aware of an API), I had to write the same method every time. I’d like to think this paid off for me, when writing JS I have a good heuristic on what methods do what that was slowly developed over constant repetition. Now that I’m mentoring others I notice how others work with these modern editor features. It’s certainly faster than how I did it but I do wonder if there is a difference in aptitude. When I worked at my first large corporation there was a very intelligent dev. I noticed over time he never really looked up answers on stack overflow or random blogs. He always went straight to the docs and the source code itself. I like to think his method of deliberate slowdown has paid off massively, even the way he asks questions was better than the rest of us. It is hard to know which ways are better for learning and in the end we were all roughly making the same amount but there has to be something more to the usual pedagogy for software engineering. I do wonder if tools like autocomplete, myriad of internet answers or musings, and now LLMs may be a hindrance for initial learning but it’s always hard to make these arguments because we have the benefit of learned experience whereas the new generation are now using different tools than us yet still arrive at the same conclusions.

skittleson 2y ago

Agreed. I dont want kids to use this until they are much older... it's a crutch. They are not applying critical thinking skills when using a LLM. The value is when children try->fail->try->fail->try->succeed. It builds up problem-solve abilities.

jcims 2y ago

If your goal is passing a test or rushing through homework then yes. But if you’re actually curious about a topic and understand the limitations of LLMs and how to use prompt language you can actually learn quite a lot from them.