Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

koshyjohn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 656 posts

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#141

Post by imiric »

xnx wrote: post #75
staticshock wrote: post #66

The eloquence with which this point gets (repeatedly) made is continuing to improve each next time I read it. However, I still feel like we haven't nailed it. That is, we are not yet at the "aphorism" stage of the discourse (e.g. "the medium is the message", "you ship your org chart", "9 mothers can't make a baby in a month"), in which the most pointed version of this critique packs a punch in just a few words that r…

This concept won't reach that point because when you chisel too hard it crumbles. There are countless lower level tasks that typical programmers no longer learn how to do. Our capacity for knowledge is not unlimited so we offload everything we can to move to the next level of abstraction.

The idea that a tool intended to replace all human cognitive work is the next level of abstraction is so fundamentally flawed, that I'm not sure it's made in good faith anymore. The most charitable interpretation I can think of is that it's a coping mechanism for being made redundant.

Nevermind the fact that these tools are nowhere near as capable as their marketing suggests. Once companies and society start hitting the brick wall of inevitable consequences of the current hype cycle, there will be a great crash, followed by industry correction. Only then will actually useful applications of this technology surface, of which there are plenty. We've seen how this plays out a few times before already.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#142

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

keeda wrote: post #128
Jcampuzano2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineer as a term has already drifted vastly since nobody in the field of "Software Engineering" is actually an Engineer if we go by a strict definitions. Engineers are accredited and in some countries even come with a title.

> ... nobody in the field of "Software Engineering" is actually an Engineer if we go by a strict definitions. This is a pet peeve of mine, so while I understand what you mean, I will challenge you to come up with a strict definition that excludes software engineering! And since I've had this discussion before, I'll pre-emptively hazard a guess that the argument boils down to "rigor", and point out that a) economic fe…

It's a pet peeve because the truth hurts. We (most of us) aren't doing anything that resembles engineering.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#144

Post by nkrisc »

ctvdev wrote: post #115
staticshock wrote: post #66

The eloquence with which this point gets (repeatedly) made is continuing to improve each next time I read it. However, I still feel like we haven't nailed it. That is, we are not yet at the "aphorism" stage of the discourse (e.g. "the medium is the message", "you ship your org chart", "9 mothers can't make a baby in a month"), in which the most pointed version of this critique packs a punch in just a few words that r…

> That is, we are not yet at the "aphorism" stage of the discourse we learn by doing

Put differently: you get good at what you actually do, not what you think you're doing.

If you're not coding anymore, but using AI tools, you're developing skills in using those AI tools, and your code abilities will atrophy unless exercised elsewhere.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#145

Post by IceDane »

staticshock wrote: post #66

The eloquence with which this point gets (repeatedly) made is continuing to improve each next time I read it. However, I still feel like we haven't nailed it. That is, we are not yet at the "aphorism" stage of the discourse (e.g. "the medium is the message", "you ship your org chart", "9 mothers can't make a baby in a month"), in which the most pointed version of this critique packs a punch in just a few words that r…

Outsource manual labor, not your brain.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#146

Post by nkrisc »

m4rkuskk wrote: post #45

Before AI I would spend multiple days mapping out my database tables and queries while now I ask AI to propose multiple different approaches and I pick the best one. But then on the other hand I’m working on 10 features at the same time and have to carefully look through them. But I can see that I’m totally dependent on the AI now. Creating a full plan by yourself feels like a waste of time, since you know the AI can…

> Creating a full plan by yourself feels like a waste of time, since you know the AI can create the same or better plan in a split second.

It IS a waste of time if your only goal is the creation of the plan. However, one must be very self-aware of their goals because if one of the unacknowledged ones is to retain the ability to create plans, then you must continue creating plans yourself.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#148

Post by IceDane »

lsy wrote: post #117
xnx wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This concept won't reach that point because when you chisel too hard it crumbles. There are countless lower level tasks that typical programmers no longer learn how to do. Our capacity for knowledge is not unlimited so we offload everything we can to move to the next level of abstraction.

AI coding isn’t an abstraction, though. You can’t treat a prompt like source code because it will give you a different output every time you use it. An abstraction lets you offload cognitive capacity while retaining knowledge of “what you are doing”. With AI coding either you need to carefully review outputs and you aren’t saving any cognitive capacity, or you aren’t looking at the outputs and don’t know what you’re…

It's staggering to me how many times I've heard this argument that LLMs are just the next level of abstraction. Some people are even comparing them to compilers.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#149

Post by whatspt_anyway »

luckystarr wrote: post #133

The way I use AI now feels more exhausting than the programming I did for the last 20 years. I pose a problem, then evaluate proposals, then pick the one I think is the "right one"(tm), then see the AI propose a bunch of weird shit, then call it out, refine the proposal until it feels just about right (this is the exhausting part), then let it code the proposal. The coding will then run for 1-5 hours and produce some…

[dead]

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#150

Post by eleumik »

cyberpunk wrote: post #68
cyclopeanutopia wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, not anymore. Many already forgot how to do that and it's not a joke. And putting aside the vanishing skill, there is also an issue of volume.

So... Our jobs are safe then? I mean, assuming we don't also atrophy to the same extent as the 'many'?

It's the "our jobs are lost" attitude that is part of problem. Is not about that. Is more quality thinking, is daring, not fearing or hoping
Post reply on HN