3 ms·

> I don't agree with the luddite-esque AI views like using ChatGPT makes you dumber and it thinks for you I believe there are studies that indicate this to be

> I don't agree with the luddite-esque AI views like using ChatGPT makes you dumber and it thinks for you I believe there are studies that indicate this to be true, however.

refulgentis 2mo ago
My $0.000002: You dont need a study to know delegating task X can make you worse at task X, nor do you need one to know its vacuously true and avoidable.
- ColdStream 2mo ago
  Pretty much. I don't know the vast majority of phone numbers of family and friends because my phone remembers it for me. When you delegate demands, you reallocate your resources.
- bulbar 2mo ago
  The world is more complex, though: maybe people delegate thinking in some areas to be able to have more resources to think about other areas that are more relevant to them?
  - dgellow 2mo ago
    Maybe, sure, in the sense that it’s possible. Is it plausible though?
- wraptile 2mo ago
  This is not necessarily true if you spend more than 2 seconds thinking about it. If I'm raking leaves all day I eventually reach diminishing returns. My arms might even start to get tired and actually make me lose skill. Now I got a leaf raking robot which is not perfect but does 50% of the job and gives me free time to recover my hands and research new leaf raking techniques, maybe even invest into a leaf blower. Did I not become better at raking leaves? People are not calculators - all these simplistic takes are frankly insulting to human capability.
  - dgellow 2mo ago
    You don’t need to go to irrelevant analogies such as removing leaves. Humans develop expertise by overcoming their struggles. When you delegate thinking and engaging with source material to a software you’re skipping the actual thing that makes us improve intellectually speaking. Have you never had to learn a new language or a music instrument? AI can just translate a text into your native language, or tell you how the sentence should be built, but you have to actually actively engage with the low level process of trying to do yourself all the little boring things, a lot, for a long time, to develop the intuition and expertise
    - wraptile 2mo ago
      You're missing my point entirely. To counter you music example - grinding the same chord over and over does not make you a better musician more than watching youtube videos of other people playing. Skill growth is not as simple as it is in video games - you need variety and rest to actually grow your skill rather than mindless task repetition. This is where AI tools, when used correctly, can result to great growth.
      - dgellow 2mo ago
        You need both, the task repetition and the resting. Even better if the task repetition isn’t mindless, I don’t know why you added that qualifier. And actually, grinding the exact same chord over and over can improve your music. You won’t become a grandiose composer, and even unlikely to become a descent musician from that alone, but you will definitely evolve from a messy play to something more comfortable over time. And likely get ideas and motivation for what to do next. I really don’t think AI tools are good to use as a non expert, they nudge you away from meaningful engagement
      - skinfaxi 2mo ago
        > To counter you music example - grinding the same chord over and over does not make you a better musician more than watching youtube videos of other people playing. It does if you are still learning fingerings. Repetition absolutely helps build skill. Would you argue an athlete standing on a mark and practicing the same shot over and over is not improving their skill?
awongh 2mo ago
For the people who believe this, I think it deeply reflects how they think about all knowledge and the kinds of things they would use this technology for- "finding the answers to things without having to think about them"- that's only one way to use it, and the least compelling way, in my opinion.
- palmotea 2mo ago
  Struggling with things is important for understanding and thinking about things, and AI gives you a way to bypass that struggle. People will take that bypass, because to resist it takes willpower. It makes it harder to follow the path you need to. It's sort of like exercise: it used to be required and unavoidable (you had to walk to get anywhere), now it's optional so most people don't do it with anywhere near enough regularity or intensity.
yunnpp 2mo ago
Can't be dumber if you're already dumbmaxxed.
wraptile 2mo ago
[flagged]
- dgellow 2mo ago
  Could we stop with the Luddite label? It’s such a lazy, vague way to gesture that you find some people dumb instead of using a more descriptive term to communicate who you’re referring to. Virtually nobody who would define as AI skeptic or anti-AI identifies as a Luddite
  - wraptile 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    - jazzyjackson 2mo ago
      Then you want Lemming, not Luddite. But even then those animals were tossed off a cliff, not blindly following.
    - amiga386 2mo ago
      Actually, it's an apt label because the machine looms were brought in by factory owners so they could employ less skilled operators who commanded a much lower wage, and the factory owners pocketed the difference. Skilled weavers were up in arms and smashed the machines. Today, the purpose of AI is not to get a machine to do your job, it's to look good enough to persuade your boss to sack you and split your salary between the boss and the AI company.
      - wraptile 2mo ago
        > Skilled weavers were up in arms and smashed the machines. And how did that work out of them? People conveniently ignore that part of history which seems to clearly indicate that outright destruction rarely leads to progress. With AI, I'd argue that we have much more opportunity to steer than to destroy, and the latter is not even a viable option so - why even entertain it at all? It's just raging for raging sake.

> I don't agree with the luddite-esque AI views like using ChatGPT makes you dumber and it thinks for you I believe there are studies that indicate this to be true, however.

refulgentis 2mo ago

My $0.000002: You dont need a study to know delegating task X can make you worse at task X, nor do you need one to know its vacuously true and avoidable.

ColdStream 2mo ago
Pretty much. I don't know the vast majority of phone numbers of family and friends because my phone remembers it for me. When you delegate demands, you reallocate your resources.
bulbar 2mo ago
The world is more complex, though: maybe people delegate thinking in some areas to be able to have more resources to think about other areas that are more relevant to them?
- dgellow 2mo ago
  Maybe, sure, in the sense that it’s possible. Is it plausible though?
wraptile 2mo ago
This is not necessarily true if you spend more than 2 seconds thinking about it. If I'm raking leaves all day I eventually reach diminishing returns. My arms might even start to get tired and actually make me lose skill. Now I got a leaf raking robot which is not perfect but does 50% of the job and gives me free time to recover my hands and research new leaf raking techniques, maybe even invest into a leaf blower. Did I not become better at raking leaves? People are not calculators - all these simplistic takes are frankly insulting to human capability.
- dgellow 2mo ago
  You don’t need to go to irrelevant analogies such as removing leaves. Humans develop expertise by overcoming their struggles. When you delegate thinking and engaging with source material to a software you’re skipping the actual thing that makes us improve intellectually speaking. Have you never had to learn a new language or a music instrument? AI can just translate a text into your native language, or tell you how the sentence should be built, but you have to actually actively engage with the low level process of trying to do yourself all the little boring things, a lot, for a long time, to develop the intuition and expertise
  - wraptile 2mo ago
    You're missing my point entirely. To counter you music example - grinding the same chord over and over does not make you a better musician more than watching youtube videos of other people playing. Skill growth is not as simple as it is in video games - you need variety and rest to actually grow your skill rather than mindless task repetition. This is where AI tools, when used correctly, can result to great growth.
    - dgellow 2mo ago
      You need both, the task repetition and the resting. Even better if the task repetition isn’t mindless, I don’t know why you added that qualifier. And actually, grinding the exact same chord over and over can improve your music. You won’t become a grandiose composer, and even unlikely to become a descent musician from that alone, but you will definitely evolve from a messy play to something more comfortable over time. And likely get ideas and motivation for what to do next. I really don’t think AI tools are good to use as a non expert, they nudge you away from meaningful engagement
    - skinfaxi 2mo ago
      > To counter you music example - grinding the same chord over and over does not make you a better musician more than watching youtube videos of other people playing. It does if you are still learning fingerings. Repetition absolutely helps build skill. Would you argue an athlete standing on a mark and practicing the same shot over and over is not improving their skill?

awongh 2mo ago

For the people who believe this, I think it deeply reflects how they think about all knowledge and the kinds of things they would use this technology for- "finding the answers to things without having to think about them"- that's only one way to use it, and the least compelling way, in my opinion.

palmotea 2mo ago
Struggling with things is important for understanding and thinking about things, and AI gives you a way to bypass that struggle. People will take that bypass, because to resist it takes willpower. It makes it harder to follow the path you need to. It's sort of like exercise: it used to be required and unavoidable (you had to walk to get anywhere), now it's optional so most people don't do it with anywhere near enough regularity or intensity.

yunnpp 2mo ago

Can't be dumber if you're already dumbmaxxed.

wraptile 2mo ago

[flagged]

dgellow 2mo ago
Could we stop with the Luddite label? It’s such a lazy, vague way to gesture that you find some people dumb instead of using a more descriptive term to communicate who you’re referring to. Virtually nobody who would define as AI skeptic or anti-AI identifies as a Luddite
- wraptile 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - jazzyjackson 2mo ago
    Then you want Lemming, not Luddite. But even then those animals were tossed off a cliff, not blindly following.
  - amiga386 2mo ago
    Actually, it's an apt label because the machine looms were brought in by factory owners so they could employ less skilled operators who commanded a much lower wage, and the factory owners pocketed the difference. Skilled weavers were up in arms and smashed the machines. Today, the purpose of AI is not to get a machine to do your job, it's to look good enough to persuade your boss to sack you and split your salary between the boss and the AI company.
    - wraptile 2mo ago
      > Skilled weavers were up in arms and smashed the machines. And how did that work out of them? People conveniently ignore that part of history which seems to clearly indicate that outright destruction rarely leads to progress. With AI, I'd argue that we have much more opportunity to steer than to destroy, and the latter is not even a viable option so - why even entertain it at all? It's just raging for raging sake.