4 ms·

I would guess this is a tongue-in-cheek essay (I hope), but it’s probably kind of prescient. I’m old enough to remember when calculators were banned from class

I would guess this is a tongue-in-cheek essay (I hope), but it’s probably kind of prescient. I’m old enough to remember when calculators were banned from classrooms, for almost the exact same reasons that people are giving against AI. It’s really only a matter of time.

Dylan16807 4mo ago
I don't really follow this comparison. The protagonist was able to use an AI in the same ways they could use a calculator or most tools. You don't use them in the middle of delivering a presentation.
- ChrisMarshallNY 4mo ago
  Sure you do (but I’m pretty sure the original was a joke). Calculators, computers, phones, etc., are standard parts of any design meeting, these days. I interviewed a number of folks, over the years, that brought laptops, and used them to demonstrate their work.
  - Dylan16807 4mo ago
    I've never used a calculator in a meeting. And while people will bring a laptop for convenience it's usually to show slides, a thing that can be easily enough done without the laptop. Or to take notes, which is even easier to do by hand. And a smartphone isn't needed at all. So, really, I don't think the comparison works out. The calculator is the example that's most directly an important tool that short-circuits something you could do by hand. But again, I've never used one in a meeting and it's not the kind of thing you'd be doing much of in a meeting.
  - epihelix 4mo ago
    In research science, it's very normal to require zero aids at an interview, and has been for some time. No calculators, no laptops, no phones -- just you. Yes, you'll also give a seminar with slides to present your prior work, but the whole point of the chalktalk is that it's you, and you alone, presenting your future plans. You're grilled by the faculty on your ideas, and you have to defend yourself without any props or crutches.
  - wiseowise 4mo ago
    No, you don’t. Not in the way the essay portrays it. You don’t ask your calculator “what am I supposed to do with number 2, 2 and funny star (*)”, do you? You have a clear calculation in your mind: multiply two by two.
    - ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
      That's actually a very good catch. Like, we can talk and drive, but we usually can't talk and read something different, one or the other will be seriously hampered. We can punch in numbers into calculator mostly by mechanical memory but prompting LLMs and reading their output for most people occupies the same lane that's used for talking to other people!
  - ChrisMarshallNY 4mo ago
    As youse guys pointed out, it’s an imperfect analogy, but the Rubicon has been crossed. The cat is out of the bag. The genie is out of the bottle. The horses have left the barn. The die is cast. Alea iacta est. Ain’t gonna put the candy back in the piñata. We’ll just have to see what happens.
    - ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
      You're really trying to normalize it hard... But the reality is it's maybe true in some specific niche communities and bubbles. any given time in history different weird things were normal in small communities and bubbles. and time absolutely did not make those things "normal"
      - ChrisMarshallNY 4mo ago
        > You're really trying to normalize it hard That's an ... interesting ... interpretation. All I'm saying, is that "it is what it is." Regardless of what we think of it, it's coming. It's likely that no one actually knows what things will look like; just a few years down the road. The only surety that we have, is that it's coming; whether or not we believe in it. Acceptance is the last -but most important- stage.
        ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
        and it is how? you replied to satire/dystopian fiction. it is by definition not what it is. and it doesn't have to be. by saying oh it's inevitable believe me, "the only surety that we have" (casually inserting we like everyone is the same on that) etc. you are trying to normalize it, painting anyone not on board as not part of "us", outcast, old fashioned and anti progress. often when people do this sort of attempt at manipulation they have vested interest. because if public opinion shifts sufficiently anti chatbots etc, which it is doing currently, and the government responds like a democracy would (or people take matters into their own hands), they lose actual money.
        4mo ago
ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
X were banned because you need to learn or demonstrate the ability to do Y. X = calculator, Y = addition and subtraction X = LLM, Y = thinking they are not the same

Dylan16807 4mo ago

I don't really follow this comparison. The protagonist was able to use an AI in the same ways they could use a calculator or most tools. You don't use them in the middle of delivering a presentation.

ChrisMarshallNY 4mo ago
Sure you do (but I’m pretty sure the original was a joke). Calculators, computers, phones, etc., are standard parts of any design meeting, these days. I interviewed a number of folks, over the years, that brought laptops, and used them to demonstrate their work.
- Dylan16807 4mo ago
  I've never used a calculator in a meeting. And while people will bring a laptop for convenience it's usually to show slides, a thing that can be easily enough done without the laptop. Or to take notes, which is even easier to do by hand. And a smartphone isn't needed at all. So, really, I don't think the comparison works out. The calculator is the example that's most directly an important tool that short-circuits something you could do by hand. But again, I've never used one in a meeting and it's not the kind of thing you'd be doing much of in a meeting.
- epihelix 4mo ago
  In research science, it's very normal to require zero aids at an interview, and has been for some time. No calculators, no laptops, no phones -- just you. Yes, you'll also give a seminar with slides to present your prior work, but the whole point of the chalktalk is that it's you, and you alone, presenting your future plans. You're grilled by the faculty on your ideas, and you have to defend yourself without any props or crutches.
- wiseowise 4mo ago
  No, you don’t. Not in the way the essay portrays it. You don’t ask your calculator “what am I supposed to do with number 2, 2 and funny star (*)”, do you? You have a clear calculation in your mind: multiply two by two.
  - ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
    That's actually a very good catch. Like, we can talk and drive, but we usually can't talk and read something different, one or the other will be seriously hampered. We can punch in numbers into calculator mostly by mechanical memory but prompting LLMs and reading their output for most people occupies the same lane that's used for talking to other people!
- ChrisMarshallNY 4mo ago
  As youse guys pointed out, it’s an imperfect analogy, but the Rubicon has been crossed. The cat is out of the bag. The genie is out of the bottle. The horses have left the barn. The die is cast. Alea iacta est. Ain’t gonna put the candy back in the piñata. We’ll just have to see what happens.
  - ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
    You're really trying to normalize it hard... But the reality is it's maybe true in some specific niche communities and bubbles. any given time in history different weird things were normal in small communities and bubbles. and time absolutely did not make those things "normal"
    - ChrisMarshallNY 4mo ago
      > You're really trying to normalize it hard That's an ... interesting ... interpretation. All I'm saying, is that "it is what it is." Regardless of what we think of it, it's coming. It's likely that no one actually knows what things will look like; just a few years down the road. The only surety that we have, is that it's coming; whether or not we believe in it. Acceptance is the last -but most important- stage.
      - ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
        and it is how? you replied to satire/dystopian fiction. it is by definition not what it is. and it doesn't have to be. by saying oh it's inevitable believe me, "the only surety that we have" (casually inserting we like everyone is the same on that) etc. you are trying to normalize it, painting anyone not on board as not part of "us", outcast, old fashioned and anti progress. often when people do this sort of attempt at manipulation they have vested interest. because if public opinion shifts sufficiently anti chatbots etc, which it is doing currently, and the government responds like a democracy would (or people take matters into their own hands), they lose actual money.
        4mo ago

ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago

X were banned because you need to learn or demonstrate the ability to do Y. X = calculator, Y = addition and subtraction X = LLM, Y = thinking they are not the same