3 ms·
I think the argument is the average person might be less useful than ever without the crutch of AI. A nation of useless dolts unable to compose a sentence or fi
by aerostable_slug 1y ago
I think the argument is the average person might be less useful than ever without the crutch of AI. A nation of useless dolts unable to compose a sentence or figure a simple sum in their head, dependent on their assistants & their personalized feed of slop.
Some of this is simple progress and fine, some of it is terrifying to comprehend.
- leakycap 1y agoI understand the line of thinking, I've considered it - but how is it different than every other "the sky is falling" fear-mongering about the future during previous revolutionary technologies? People in general don't shoe horses anymore, but we also do not need to know how to. Same with crank engine cars. Same with manual transmissions in the USA. That's just the changes in personal transport in a few generations.
- foxglacier 1y agoWriting and doing science are separate skills. It limits what people can do if we require the same skills to exist in the same person. That doesn't mean we have useless dolts but that we have people giving more of their time and mental effort to their specialty and capable people who were excluded because they couldn't write can have access to it.