Live data from Hacker News

AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

elroy.bot

191–200 of 218 posts

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#191
The blog still assumes that AI does not affect Mastery. I think it does.

All the AI junk like Agents in Service centers that you need to outplay in order to get in touch with a human, us as consumers are accepting this new status quo. We will accept products that sometimes can do crazy stuff because of hallucinations. Why? Ultimate capitalism consumerism sheepism, some other ism.

So AI (and whether it is correlarion or causation, i dont know) also corresponds with lower level of Mastery

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#192
post #147
post #50

The blog post has a bunch of charts, which gives it a veneer of objectivity and rigor, but in reality it's just all vibes and conjecture. Meanwhile recent empirical studies actually point in the opposite direction, showing that AI use increases inequality, not decrease it. https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250215_FNC... https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/13/h...

Of course AI increases inequality. It's automated ladder pulling technology. To become good at something you have to work through the lower rungs and acquire skill. AI does all those lower level jobs, puts the people who need those jobs for experience on the street, and robs us of future experts. The people who benefit the most are those who are already up on top of the ladder investing billions to make the ladder ra…

When you have an unfair system, every technology advancement will benefit the few more than the many.

So off course AI falls into this realm.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#193
The learning-with-AI curve should cross back under the learning-without-AI curve at towards the higher end even without "cheating".

The very highest levels of mastery can only come from slow, careful, self-directed learning that someone in a hurry to speedrun the process isn't focusing on.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#194
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inter- implies relationships between entities, intra- implies relationships within entities. In any single sentence context they cannot refer to the same relationships, and that which they are not is precisely the domain of the other word: they are true antonyms.

> and that which they are not is precisely the domain of the other word External relationships are a thing, which are in neither of those domains. An intramural activity is not the same thing as an intermural activity, but the overwhelming majority of activities which are not intramural activities are not intermural activities either, most are extramural activities.

> External relationships are a thing, which are in neither of those domains.

They are a subset of inter-, pretty obviously.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly not sure it is easier to learn coding today than before. In theory maybe but in reality 99% of people will use AI as a crutch - half or learning is when you have to struggle a bit with something. If all the answers are always in front of you it will be harder to learn. I know it would be hard for me to learn if I could just ask for the code all the time.

It's much, much, much easier. I've been coding for decades already, but if I need to put something together in an unfamiliar language? I can just ask AI about any stupid noob mistake I make. It knows every single stupid noob mistake, it knows every "how do I sort an array", and it explains well, with examples. Like StackOverflow on steroids. The caveat is that you need to WANT to learn. If you don't, then not learnin…

> I've been coding for decades already, but if I need to put something together in an unfamiliar language? I can just ask AI about any stupid noob mistake I make.

So you aren’t still learning foundational concepts or how to think about problems, you are using it as a translation tool. Very different, in my opinion.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#198
post #147
post #50

The blog post has a bunch of charts, which gives it a veneer of objectivity and rigor, but in reality it's just all vibes and conjecture. Meanwhile recent empirical studies actually point in the opposite direction, showing that AI use increases inequality, not decrease it. https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250215_FNC... https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/13/h...

Of course AI increases inequality. It's automated ladder pulling technology. To become good at something you have to work through the lower rungs and acquire skill. AI does all those lower level jobs, puts the people who need those jobs for experience on the street, and robs us of future experts. The people who benefit the most are those who are already up on top of the ladder investing billions to make the ladder ra…

AI has been extremely useful at teaching me things. Granted I needed to already know how to learn and work through the math myself, but when I get stuck it is more helpful than any other resource on the internet.

> To become good at something you have to work through the lower rungs and acquire skill. AI does all those lower level jobs, puts the people who need those jobs for experience on the street, and robs us of future experts.

You can still do that with AI, you give yourself assignments and then use the AI as a resource when you get stuck. As you get better you ask the AI less and less. The fact that the AI is wrong sometimes is like test that allows you to evaluate if you are internalizing the skills or just trusting the AI.

If we ever have AIs which don't hallucinate, I'd want that added back in as a feature.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. As a retired mathematician who craves the productivity of an obsessed 28 year old, I've been all in on AI in 2025. I'm now on Claude's $200/month Max plan in order to use Claude Code Opus 4 without restraint. I still hit limits, usually when I run parallel sessions to review a 57 file legacy code base. For a time I refused to talk with anybody or read anything about AI, because it was all noise that didn't match…

Can you explain your finger analogy a little more? What do the fingers represent?

Would you sit on a stool with legs three inches apart?

For a statistician, determining a plane from three approximate points on the plane is far more accurate if the points aren't next to each other.

When we offer examples or associations in a prompt, we experience a similar effect in coaxing a response from AI. This is counter-intuitive.

I'm fully aware that most of what I post on HN is intended for each future AI training corpus. If what I have to say was already understood I wouldn't say it.

Re: AI is a floor raiser, not a ceiling raiser

#200
So speaking of "mastery":

I wanted to know how to clone a single folder in a Git repository. Having done this before, I knew that there was some incantation I needed to make to the git CLI to do it, but I couldn't remember what it was.

I'm very anti-AI for a number of reasons, but I've been trying to use it here and there to give it the benefit of the doubt and avoid becoming a _complete_ dinosaur. (I was very anti-vim ages ago when I learned emacs; I spent two weeks with vim and never looked back. I apply this philosophy to almost everything as a result.)

I asked Qwen3-235B (reasoning) via Kagi Assistant how I could do this. It gave me a long block of text back that told me to do the thing I didn't want it to do: mkdir a directory, clone into it, move the directory I wanted into the root of the directory, delete everything else.

When I asked it if it was possible to do this without creating the directory, it, incorrectly, told me that it was not. It used RAG-retrieved content in its chain of thought, for what that's worth.

It took me only 30 seconds or so to find the answer I wanted on StackOverflow. It was the second most popular answer in the thread. (git clone --filter=tree: --depth=0, then git sparse-checkout set --no-cone $FOLDER, found here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/52269934)

I nudged the Assistant a smidge more by asking it if there was a subcommand I could use instead. It, then, suggested "sparse-checkout init", which, according to the man page for this subcommand, is deprecated in favor of "set". (I went to the man page to understand what the "cone" method was and stumbled on that tidbit.)

THIS is the thing that disappoints me so much about LLMs being heralded as the next generation of search. Search engines give you many, many sources to guide you to the correct answer if you're willing to do the work. LLM services tell you what the "answer" is, even if it's wrong. You get potential misinformation back while also turning your brain off and learning less; a classic lose-lose.

Post reply on HN