5 ms·

Yeah tell them to change things.. why didn't we think of that? Provide opportunities to make parenting less stressful like here so that they can involve more..

Yeah tell them to change things.. why didn't we think of that? Provide opportunities to make parenting less stressful like here so that they can involve more.. this reflexive anti AI luddite attitude isn't productive as it's just less signal and more noise..

forgetfreeman 3mo ago
"reflexive anti AI luddite attitude" That's awfully reductive there, champ. Most critiques of AI are based on some combination of observed failings of the technology, observed failings of the tech industry writ large, and healthy skepticism in the face of Yet Another Tech Industry Hype Typhoon. Anyway, the burden of proof isn't on skeptics, it's on the technology and it's proponents, so let's see some receipts before we agree to squander limited public resources on unproven systems yeah?
- logicchains 3mo ago
  >Most critiques of AI are based on some combination of observed failings of the technology Most critiques of AI are based on experience with the cheapest AI available a year ago, by midwits unable to recognize that AI's performance on the Putnam, IMO and bar exam makes it far smarter than they are by almost every metric that was traditionally used to measure intelligence.
  - bluefirebrand 3mo ago
    > Most critiques of AI are based on experience with the cheapest AI available a year ago, by midwits You don't even need to use AI at all to have valid critiques of it Plenty of other people are showing its flaws daily by replacing their entire personalities with AI slop Oh it can do some impressive stuff sure. It is still bad for society
    - Marha01 3mo ago
      > You don't even need to use AI at all to have valid critiques of it You cannot rationally criticize something if you have no up-to-date knowledge about it.
      - forgetfreeman 3mo ago
        The industry hype mill and it's attendant horde of touts are working overtime to make sure the dude that mows my lawn is up to date on AI, so I'm not sure how you're going to advance the argument that anyone routinely posting to the epicenter of the AI hype typhoon is some how poorly informed on the topic.
      - bluefirebrand 3mo ago
        That's like saying you can't know if a stove is hot without putting your hand on it
    - lern_too_spel 3mo ago
      To make my earlier critique of your argument clearer, some applications of AI might be bad for society, but it does not follow that the tutoring application is also bad for society.
      - forgetfreeman 3mo ago
        Educational outcomes tank when computers are introduced to classrooms. It absolutely follows that AI as a tutoring application is bad for society. https://fortune.com/2026/03/14/america-math-and-reading-scores-tanked-edtech-ai-brain-rot/ https://fortune.com/2026/03/14/america-math-and-reading-scor...
        Marha01 3mo ago
        > Educational outcomes tank when computers are introduced to classrooms. Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.
        forgetfreeman 3mo ago
        Fair, but when presented with a situation where one side of an argument has evidence and the other has baseless assertions the choice is rather plain.
        lern_too_spel 3mo ago
        It does not follow that anything produced by an electronic computational device is bad for children or society. I've personally seen computers teach children barely two years old to read.
        forgetfreeman 3mo ago
        Anecdote < Data. Studies consistently show declines in every trackable metric associated with education when computational devices are introduced to the process. Until actual data is presented that contradicts these findings there's no grounds for rational debate.
bluefirebrand 3mo ago
It's not reflexive, I've spent a lot of time and effort considering why I think AI is bad for society.
- lern_too_spel 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - byzantinegene 3mo ago
    yes, an using it as an educational tool for 5-year olds is an unproven use we don't need to implement.
    - avadodin 3mo ago
      hmm bad attitude ZAP
  - nkrisc 3mo ago
    In many ways electricity is bad for society. In this particular case I think the benefits outweigh the costs. I do not the think the benefits of AI outweigh the costs.
nkrisc 3mo ago
A reflexive anti-AI Luddite attitude is the healthy default until there is overwhelming evidence otherwise. We should be wary of all new technology until it’s proven to be a benefit to society.
- Marha01 3mo ago
  > We should be wary of all new technology until it’s proven to be a benefit to society. Nope. Any nation that thinks like this will be outcompeted by more tech-positive nations in the long-term. It's on the luddites to demonstrate evidence of harm, if they want some use of technology banned.
  - nkrisc 3mo ago
    > It's on the luddites to demonstrate evidence of harm, if they want some use of technology banned. But then we're told we can't put the genie back in the bottle, it's too late, so we just have to suck it up and deal with it. There's nothing preventing us from taking a more measured approach to new technology other than choice.
  - jplusequalt 3mo ago
    >It's on the luddites to demonstrate evidence of harm, if they want some use of technology banned. Here's one study from last year (1000 students) [1]. They showed that improved outcomes with AI are short term, and likely a result of AI doing the work for the student. Their methodology involved a test without the use of AI at a later date, and one of the groups who used AI tested much worse than the control group who did not use AI during learning. Moreover, a tertiary group that used a specially trained AI for tutoring showed no improvement in testing outcomes over the control group. [1] Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakçı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). "Generative AI Without Guardrails Can Harm Learning: Evidence from High School Mathematics." PNAS, 122. PNAS

forgetfreeman 3mo ago

"reflexive anti AI luddite attitude" That's awfully reductive there, champ. Most critiques of AI are based on some combination of observed failings of the technology, observed failings of the tech industry writ large, and healthy skepticism in the face of Yet Another Tech Industry Hype Typhoon. Anyway, the burden of proof isn't on skeptics, it's on the technology and it's proponents, so let's see some receipts before we agree to squander limited public resources on unproven systems yeah?

logicchains 3mo ago
>Most critiques of AI are based on some combination of observed failings of the technology Most critiques of AI are based on experience with the cheapest AI available a year ago, by midwits unable to recognize that AI's performance on the Putnam, IMO and bar exam makes it far smarter than they are by almost every metric that was traditionally used to measure intelligence.
- bluefirebrand 3mo ago
  > Most critiques of AI are based on experience with the cheapest AI available a year ago, by midwits You don't even need to use AI at all to have valid critiques of it Plenty of other people are showing its flaws daily by replacing their entire personalities with AI slop Oh it can do some impressive stuff sure. It is still bad for society
  - Marha01 3mo ago
    > You don't even need to use AI at all to have valid critiques of it You cannot rationally criticize something if you have no up-to-date knowledge about it.
    - forgetfreeman 3mo ago
      The industry hype mill and it's attendant horde of touts are working overtime to make sure the dude that mows my lawn is up to date on AI, so I'm not sure how you're going to advance the argument that anyone routinely posting to the epicenter of the AI hype typhoon is some how poorly informed on the topic.
    - bluefirebrand 3mo ago
      That's like saying you can't know if a stove is hot without putting your hand on it
  - lern_too_spel 3mo ago
    To make my earlier critique of your argument clearer, some applications of AI might be bad for society, but it does not follow that the tutoring application is also bad for society.
    - forgetfreeman 3mo ago
      Educational outcomes tank when computers are introduced to classrooms. It absolutely follows that AI as a tutoring application is bad for society. https://fortune.com/2026/03/14/america-math-and-reading-scores-tanked-edtech-ai-brain-rot/ https://fortune.com/2026/03/14/america-math-and-reading-scor...
      - Marha01 3mo ago
        > Educational outcomes tank when computers are introduced to classrooms. Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.
        forgetfreeman 3mo ago
        Fair, but when presented with a situation where one side of an argument has evidence and the other has baseless assertions the choice is rather plain.
      - lern_too_spel 3mo ago
        It does not follow that anything produced by an electronic computational device is bad for children or society. I've personally seen computers teach children barely two years old to read.
        forgetfreeman 3mo ago
        Anecdote < Data. Studies consistently show declines in every trackable metric associated with education when computational devices are introduced to the process. Until actual data is presented that contradicts these findings there's no grounds for rational debate.

bluefirebrand 3mo ago

It's not reflexive, I've spent a lot of time and effort considering why I think AI is bad for society.

lern_too_spel 3mo ago
[flagged]
- byzantinegene 3mo ago
  yes, an using it as an educational tool for 5-year olds is an unproven use we don't need to implement.
  - avadodin 3mo ago
    hmm bad attitude ZAP
- nkrisc 3mo ago
  In many ways electricity is bad for society. In this particular case I think the benefits outweigh the costs. I do not the think the benefits of AI outweigh the costs.

nkrisc 3mo ago

A reflexive anti-AI Luddite attitude is the healthy default until there is overwhelming evidence otherwise. We should be wary of all new technology until it’s proven to be a benefit to society.

Marha01 3mo ago
> We should be wary of all new technology until it’s proven to be a benefit to society. Nope. Any nation that thinks like this will be outcompeted by more tech-positive nations in the long-term. It's on the luddites to demonstrate evidence of harm, if they want some use of technology banned.
- nkrisc 3mo ago
  > It's on the luddites to demonstrate evidence of harm, if they want some use of technology banned. But then we're told we can't put the genie back in the bottle, it's too late, so we just have to suck it up and deal with it. There's nothing preventing us from taking a more measured approach to new technology other than choice.
- jplusequalt 3mo ago
  >It's on the luddites to demonstrate evidence of harm, if they want some use of technology banned. Here's one study from last year (1000 students) [1]. They showed that improved outcomes with AI are short term, and likely a result of AI doing the work for the student. Their methodology involved a test without the use of AI at a later date, and one of the groups who used AI tested much worse than the control group who did not use AI during learning. Moreover, a tertiary group that used a specially trained AI for tutoring showed no improvement in testing outcomes over the control group. [1] Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakçı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). "Generative AI Without Guardrails Can Harm Learning: Evidence from High School Mathematics." PNAS, 122. PNAS