3 ms·

> The person who showed their work on the math test is 9/10 times is doing better in life than the person that only knew how to use a calculator Sure but once

by slibhb 8mo ago

> The person who showed their work on the math test is 9/10 times is doing better in life than the person that only knew how to use a calculator Sure but once you learn long multiplication/division algorithms by hand there's not much point in using them. By high school everyone is using a calculator. > Just like when people started losing their ability to navigate without a GPS/Maps app Are you suggesting people shouldn't use Google Maps? Seems kind of nuts. Similar to calculators, the lesson here is that progress works by obviating the need to think about some thing. Paper maps and compasses work the same way, they render some older skill obsolete. The written word made memorization infinitely less valuable (and writing had its critics). I don't think "LLMs making us dumber" is a real concern. Yes, people will lose some skills. Before calculators, adults were probably way better at doing arithmetic. But this isn't something worth prioritizing. However, it is worth teaching people to code by hand, just like we still teach arithmetic and times tables. But ultimately, once we've learned these things, we're going to use tools that supercede them. There's nothig new or scary about this, and it will be a significant net win.

jplusequalt 8mo ago
>I don't think "LLMs making us dumber" is a real concern. Yes, people will lose some skills. Before calculators, adults were probably way better at doing arithmetic. But it's a problem of scale. Calculators are very specific tools. If you are trying to run a computation of some arithmetic/algebraic expression, then they are a great tool. But they're not going to get you far if you need help understanding how to file your taxes. LLMs are multi-faceted tools. They can help with math, doing taxes, coding, doing research, writing essays, summarizing text, etc. Basically anything that can be condensed into an embedding that the LLM can work with is fair game. If you're willing to accept that using a tool slowly erodes the skill that tool was made for, then you should also accept that you will see an erosion of MANY skill you currently have. So the question is whether this is all worth it? Is an increase in productivity worth eroding a strong foundation of general purpose knowledge? Perhaps even the ability to learn in the first place? I would argue no a million times over, but I'm starting to think that I'm an outlier.
- dakolli 8mo ago
  Yeah, I agree. However, people use llms for the same reason people drive 3 blocks to a store rather than walk. Laziness and convenience. They simply don't care if their leg muscles atrophy. However, I think people aren't taking into account how much more important your thinking "muscles" are and its way more consequential to let those atrophy. Everyone is vulnerable to the allure of taking shortcuts in life, but I've learned over the years that there is no free lunch. This is going too be quite an expensive trade off for many.
  - slibhb 8mo ago
    People will have to be more intentional about using their increased leisure time in a healthy way. There was no point in exercising if you were a peasant who worked the field all day. Today, if you sit down in an office all day, you need to exercise intentionally. People have figured this out! Along the same lines, AI will necessitate a shift where people intentionally use their extra intellectual leisure time. Reading, writing, chess, learning a new language, etc. Not everyone will do this. Some people will be the intellectual equivalent of obese. But people will figure it out eventually.
    - jplusequalt 8mo ago
      >But people will figure it out eventually. Will they? >50% of US adults are overweight or obese. Is this the example you want to hang your hat on?
      - slibhb 8mo ago
        People are figuring it out in real time. The next generation is going to be way less fat than the current one, because everyone exercises. It took time for people to adjust to a world where physical exertion is optional and delicious food is cheap, but we are getting there. I see no reason to assume the same thing won't happen with AI.
        jplusequalt 8mo ago
kuschku 8mo ago
> Sure but once you learn long multiplication/division algorithms by hand there's not much point in using them. By high school everyone is using a calculator. And many lose the ability to do long division by high school, where they'll have to relearn it for polynomial long division, which typical school calculators can't handle easily.

by slibhb 8mo ago

jplusequalt 8mo ago

>I don't think "LLMs making us dumber" is a real concern. Yes, people will lose some skills. Before calculators, adults were probably way better at doing arithmetic. But it's a problem of scale. Calculators are very specific tools. If you are trying to run a computation of some arithmetic/algebraic expression, then they are a great tool. But they're not going to get you far if you need help understanding how to file your taxes. LLMs are multi-faceted tools. They can help with math, doing taxes, coding, doing research, writing essays, summarizing text, etc. Basically anything that can be condensed into an embedding that the LLM can work with is fair game. If you're willing to accept that using a tool slowly erodes the skill that tool was made for, then you should also accept that you will see an erosion of MANY skill you currently have. So the question is whether this is all worth it? Is an increase in productivity worth eroding a strong foundation of general purpose knowledge? Perhaps even the ability to learn in the first place? I would argue no a million times over, but I'm starting to think that I'm an outlier.

dakolli 8mo ago
Yeah, I agree. However, people use llms for the same reason people drive 3 blocks to a store rather than walk. Laziness and convenience. They simply don't care if their leg muscles atrophy. However, I think people aren't taking into account how much more important your thinking "muscles" are and its way more consequential to let those atrophy. Everyone is vulnerable to the allure of taking shortcuts in life, but I've learned over the years that there is no free lunch. This is going too be quite an expensive trade off for many.
- slibhb 8mo ago
  People will have to be more intentional about using their increased leisure time in a healthy way. There was no point in exercising if you were a peasant who worked the field all day. Today, if you sit down in an office all day, you need to exercise intentionally. People have figured this out! Along the same lines, AI will necessitate a shift where people intentionally use their extra intellectual leisure time. Reading, writing, chess, learning a new language, etc. Not everyone will do this. Some people will be the intellectual equivalent of obese. But people will figure it out eventually.
  - jplusequalt 8mo ago
    >But people will figure it out eventually. Will they? >50% of US adults are overweight or obese. Is this the example you want to hang your hat on?
    - slibhb 8mo ago
      People are figuring it out in real time. The next generation is going to be way less fat than the current one, because everyone exercises. It took time for people to adjust to a world where physical exertion is optional and delicious food is cheap, but we are getting there. I see no reason to assume the same thing won't happen with AI.
      - jplusequalt 8mo ago

kuschku 8mo ago

> Sure but once you learn long multiplication/division algorithms by hand there's not much point in using them. By high school everyone is using a calculator. And many lose the ability to do long division by high school, where they'll have to relearn it for polynomial long division, which typical school calculators can't handle easily.