At the moment, the real killer use-case for the current generation of AI agents (Claude, Gemini, ChatGPT) is when you know you don't know something AND you have a specific task to get done. Some examples in past week: 1. Claude: "Why is this code failing typechecking in typescript" -> gives me detailed reasons why, teaches me about some things I didn't know about, and solves the problem for me while uplevelling my un…
Disagree here. AI can be (theoretically) trained to do any tasks with which it has an IO interface to perform the task. The same goes for humans, they can't inherently prove they "know" the information, they have to show it, via an IO interface (their hands/voice).
As such, any metric for proving human knowledge could be gamed by AI, assuming an environment where AI could be used (i.e. at home). The only places where AI can be controlled is in the classroom, like during exams or in-person activities.
So to conclude activity X has "low impact" because AI can do it, implies that all education at home has low impact, because AI could do it (through a human performing verbatim what it instructs, ignoring any explanation the AI might give).