2 ms·

Yet again, Paul Graham states his view that people other than him are incapable of thought. I'm shocked at how frequently he does this. I would be embarrassed t

Yet again, Paul Graham states his view that people other than him are incapable of thought. I'm shocked at how frequently he does this. I would be embarrassed to make such an assertion in public even once, let alone repeatedly. While the notion that AI will replace writing is somewhat prescient, the idea that it will replace thought most certainly isn't. Paul Graham is someone who writes to think, therefore he assumes writing is the only way to think. Entirely consistent with his massive and unrelenting ego and simultaneous total lack of empathy or understanding of the differences between people. I shall leave you with this quote of his—the most sneering text I've ever read: “It's not surprising that conventional-minded people would dislike inequality if independent-mindedness is one of the biggest drivers of it. But it's not simply that they don't want anyone to have what they can't. The conventional-minded literally can't imagine what it's like to have novel ideas. So the whole phenomenon of great variation in performance seems unnatural to them, and when they encounter it they assume it must be due to cheating or to some malign external influence.” - https://paulgraham.com/superlinear.html#f12n https://paulgraham.com/superlinear.html#f12n There you have it folks. The genius Paul Graham is one of a select few people with the ability to have ideas, something which those who disagree with him are simply incapable of comprehending.

DandyDev 2y ago
How is that your takeaway? Please quote the sections from his essay that led you to your conclusion. My takeaway: people that know how to write, that have trained that muscle, are better at thinking in a structured way and articulating their thoughts. The number of people that know how to write is declining, at least in part due to the advent of GenAI. The number of people who know how to write is still non zero and is not limited to only Paul Graham.
- ccozan 2y ago
  The people who like to write will still write no matter how many chatGPTs are there. New people will start writing because it enjoys them and because curiosity. But there are a lot of others which never liked to write, they do not need this for their job and why should not use this GPT as a tool like the promised land of AI / robots. Same will happen with cooking: people who like to cook will cook traditionally even after our incoming household robots will be able to.
- James_K 2y ago
  From the essay: > Instead of good writers, ok writers, and people who can't write, there will just be good writers and people who can't write. > writing is thinking. In fact there's a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing > So a world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots. I know which half I want to be in, and I bet you do too. PG states, clear as day, that he expects the world to be divided into people who can think (him) and people who can't (almost everyone else). When I say Paul Graham imagines only he can think, this is hyperbole. I'm sure there's a small group of people with views very similar to his to whom he would also attribute the ability of thought. I am commenting on the clear and undeniable pattern of PG writing that huge swathes of the population are incapable of thinking. https://xkcd.com/610/ https://xkcd.com/610/ about sums up my views on his attitude.
- hackable_sand 2y ago
  You said the same exact thing as parent Tf

DandyDev 2y ago

How is that your takeaway? Please quote the sections from his essay that led you to your conclusion. My takeaway: people that know how to write, that have trained that muscle, are better at thinking in a structured way and articulating their thoughts. The number of people that know how to write is declining, at least in part due to the advent of GenAI. The number of people who know how to write is still non zero and is not limited to only Paul Graham.

ccozan 2y ago
The people who like to write will still write no matter how many chatGPTs are there. New people will start writing because it enjoys them and because curiosity. But there are a lot of others which never liked to write, they do not need this for their job and why should not use this GPT as a tool like the promised land of AI / robots. Same will happen with cooking: people who like to cook will cook traditionally even after our incoming household robots will be able to.
James_K 2y ago
From the essay: > Instead of good writers, ok writers, and people who can't write, there will just be good writers and people who can't write. > writing is thinking. In fact there's a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing > So a world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots. I know which half I want to be in, and I bet you do too. PG states, clear as day, that he expects the world to be divided into people who can think (him) and people who can't (almost everyone else). When I say Paul Graham imagines only he can think, this is hyperbole. I'm sure there's a small group of people with views very similar to his to whom he would also attribute the ability of thought. I am commenting on the clear and undeniable pattern of PG writing that huge swathes of the population are incapable of thinking. https://xkcd.com/610/ https://xkcd.com/610/ about sums up my views on his attitude.
hackable_sand 2y ago
You said the same exact thing as parent Tf