- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
You must log in or register to comment.
I think we already came to that conclusion ourselves, Tiktok made us aware i think…leading to terms like brainrot and slop.
But it’s good to see it is recognized.
Calculators made mental math obsolete. GPS apps made people forget how to navigate on their own.
Maybe those are good innovations or not. Arguments can be made both ways, I guess.
But if AI causes critical thinking skills to atrophy, I think it’s hard to argue that that’s a good thing for humanity. Maybe the end game is that AI achieves sentience and takes over the world, but is benevolent, and takes care of us like beloved pets (humans are AI’s best friend). Is that good? Idk
Or maybe this isn’t a real issue and the study is flawed, or more realistically, my interpretation of the study is wrong because I only read the headline of this article and not the study itself?
Who knows?
It’s developed by the worst of us and taught by a bunch of shit it read on reddit. You’re thinking it might be benevolent?
I perceive my advanced tools akin to a broom.
I can mop floors alright, but I also don’t want to sit down with a cloth to do it.
If I can’t do that myself, and it does that instead of me, that’s not just my tool, that’s my employee, and the one I now depend on.
‘AI’ companies sell us billions of hours of other people’s labor to replace our own need to interject our experience and ingrain themselves into our routine. Like the coming of ads, it’s already normalized. But this time, critical parts of our life has this black box dependancy and subscription.
So, AI users exhibit a reduction in literally the one skill that the AI expects them to actually have?
I should probably go read that link and see if it’s actual degradation or just selection.
Spoiler alert : it was just a survey of the reported confidence of folk who admitted to using AI.
Thankfully the slop generated by copilot et al is absolutely useless dreck. I’ve had a significant number of tasks end up broken because someone chased a dream promised by Ai slop. “Sure, you can do that in python.” “that’s definitely how that tool works.” etc.
Well, to be fair, I never had the idea of sticking pizza toppings with glue… That’s some next level Gordian Knot stuff, right there!
Mule emoji
They said the same shit about writing, books, radio, and tv.
About writing?! Surely you have zero evidence for that.
Oh haha cause it wouldn’t be recorded
but are they wrong though?
Uh I don’t know.
Memorization used to be a huge part of education hundreds of years ago before books were common. It’s the origin of oral defence for doctorates. That excluded a huge part of the population who were great at logic and analysis.
Books became a bicycle for the brain. Imo, AI is the same. Skills such as structuring sentences into perfectly grammatically correct forms will atrophy in exchange for the focus to be on the idea.
Without appropriate structure will we be able to effectively communicate ideas?
The AI will make sense of our terrible grammar.
It’ll try at least, lol
Books became a bicycle for the brain. Imo, AI is the same. Skills such as structuring sentences into perfectly grammatically correct forms will atrophy in exchange for the focus to be on the idea.
“In the future all our thoughts will be filtered through phone keyboard next word suggestion, and this is a good thing!”
i think that being used to properly structure sentences is important for reasoning well.
i agree that the effects of books and writing were probably beneficial to the brain, although they might have atrophied the memory and something else. But im not sure about tv, radio, internet and AI.
Ehhh yes and no. There’s prescriptive grammar (how it ought to be) and descriptive grammar (how it’s actually used within communities). This is where the ideas of code switching and such come in. You can certainly reason well in a Creole, if that’s what your community speaks and how you are taught, e.g. Belizean Creole.
yes, i wasnt advocating you should know any specific grammar. and that distinction is a good point. I meant that learning a prescriptive grammar decently is an important tool for reasoning. im not saying that descriptive grammars are bad, just defending that prescriptive grammars arent as useless as people seem to judge them.
The majority of grammar rules are arbitrary and unrelated to the expression of an idea. For example, does it really matter if you treat an inanimate object like a pencil as feminine or masculine? It’s an object. Yet in Spanish/French/etc., there are grammar rules that define every inanimate object as being either feminine or masculine.
However, without a common grammar, it’s impossible to communicate accurately. For that use case, AI functions as a language translator.
yes, its very arbitrary, but these are sets of rules that you can use to structure your thoughts. language helps us reason. it doesnt matter that it is arbitrary. definitions in mathematics are very arbitrary, but they are a foundation we can lean on to reason about abstract ideas. Being arbitrary is not a testament of uselessness. Different languages, lead to different foundations for structuring ideas. But dominating at least one of those foundations can be very important cognitively.
Gendering an explicitly non gendered inanimate object helps structure your thoughts?
I’d argue that following those grammar rules damages your thoughts.
what do you mean by “explicitly non gendered”?
yeah and it does harm. Any technology amputated a part of us. The point is deciding if it’s worth the cost.
