One thing I wish this emphasized more is that adults often confuse learning with consuming material about learning, which is why my useful rule has become: if I'm not producing errors, I'm probably not practicing yet
Meta learning can be useful, but I take your overall point. You can get lost in the weeds trying to figure out the "best" way to learn something. Autodidacts do have some up-front costs: they have to figure out how to best teach themselves a thing, which usually means researching and trying various pedagogical approaches to find something that might work for them. Language learning, for example is a huge category. Yo…
Maybe you should learn something
201–210 of 218 posts
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Children are not god for peace of mind and a life of liberty. I do not recommend anyone to have children, becaues of how negatively it affects your life, cost of living etc. It is basically just tying yourself down to the wheel of consumption, and in order to jutsify everything, all the struggle, push your hopes and aspirations to the next generation, and then letting them deal with it. If you are rich, you can get a…
This comment actually triggered something in me and I wanted to write a dismissive and condescending response but in the spirit of HN I’d like to try a different approach. I’ve honestly never been able to understand this kind of thinking (uniformly ruling children as a negative because of the downsides), but I’d be curious to understand more about your perspective. How do you weigh the joy and meaning many people fin…
I see very little love from parents, but I generally see an enormous amount of selfishness. True betrayal, overt and subtle abuse, and kids seem more to push through that to really thrive… occasionally.
This idea that someone has never felt to love this powerful before? Incredibly selfish. It feels almost disgusting to write about let alone really think about. Who the hell are these people saying these things? Do they even hear themselves?
Every metric and every explanation I ever hear or read about when it comes to kids seems… ultimately selfish. The future for civilization looks awfully bleak, and bringing children to this world? Now?! Their future is a dodgy proposition at best.
Having children consistently seems to be for people with little creativity, little prospect in their lives, and very little thought or consideration for a wide and colorful world which could actually use some help instead of holding up in a house for 20 years.
Society uses our biology against us. It uses it to create enormous anxiety, depression, and poverty through having children. I wish to live the second half of my life in a meaningful way rather than shackling some unsuspecting little-me to the insane whims of hyper consumerist and capitalist culture designed only to extract everything from them and create as much anxiety and hurt as possible, that it might produce as much from them as possible.
For someone to not see that this is what most societies have become? The height of blindness; i’m not sure I’ve ever seen a parent in America who didn’t have their kids as part of this culture of spectacle , of blindly shambling without critical thinking. It’s as if most people want to collect all the check boxes in life, like little Pokémon, little experiences that they simply must have and show off to people to fluff their ego.
Sure, the process produces all kinds of crazy chemicals but so do hallucinogenic drugs. They’re basically both the same thing, but one of them really makes people unhealthy, intense, and emotionally unbalanced while the other just makes them see weird stuff that isn’t there.
The more you look at it, just the less it makes sense. All the uncritical, thoughtless people that I’ve ever met in my life are the ones having kids, while all the people I’ve respected, who are generally considerate, intelligent, kind, intentional, mindful, and honestly quite accomplished and as helpful as possible toward their fellow people? None of them have kids. Not a single one. Not my entire life. Well one. One, and it’s such a bad experience, and is so painful and difficult for he, his wife, and the child that he says he would never wish it on his worst enemy, despite absolutely loving his child and doing his best to demonstrate that every day.
I know it’s a bit rambling, but there you go.
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but human errors are based on genuine and elaborate misconceptions (or propagandistic intent), not squishy, facile "you're right to push back on that, I straight up made that up" type stuff.
I just apply the "Wikipedia model" to things like LLMs (and StackOverflow, which can be just as bad -but without the admitting error part). I look for citations and footnotes. In many cases, accuracy isn't something that I worry about, as bad info becomes apparent, almost immediately. In cases where it matters, though, I may try a couple of verifications. One problem with humans, is that we can be quite insecure, and…
Can you elaborate on this? I suspect that you’re thinking mostly of cases in which you already have a fair bit of domain expertise. But in the general case, this seems to be very untrue. Which is why it’s so pernicious that LLMs can generate such quantities of syntactically-plausible-but-factually-untrue text.
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#204This shift is such a game changer for me personally. It reduces how many times I ask myself “am I actually making any progress or just wasting time?” by putting all the pressure on “sleep’s REM phase” instead of me and my ability to learn.
I don’t like cooking mostly because of how many dishes you have to wash afterwards. Saying “your sleep will handle the learning part” is like someone saying “feel free to cook the craziest dishes, I will do all the washing afterwards”.
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just apply the "Wikipedia model" to things like LLMs (and StackOverflow, which can be just as bad -but without the admitting error part). I look for citations and footnotes. In many cases, accuracy isn't something that I worry about, as bad info becomes apparent, almost immediately. In cases where it matters, though, I may try a couple of verifications. One problem with humans, is that we can be quite insecure, and…
> bad info becomes apparent, almost immediately Can you elaborate on this? I suspect that you’re thinking mostly of cases in which you already have a fair bit of domain expertise. But in the general case, this seems to be very untrue. Which is why it’s so pernicious that LLMs can generate such quantities of syntactically-plausible-but-factually-untrue text.
Can’t really put it into precise terminology, but I get a “gut feeling,” that something is/is not plausible, and it happens pretty quickly; usually when I start some implementation. I tend to learn by do[0] (note the “sample playground,” in each essay), so the “reality filter” gets applied fairly rapidly.
In any case, I have been dealing with misinformation (sometimes, deliberate), for a long time, and I’m still working fairly effectively, so I guess it works.
Can’t argue with results.
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The feeling is that it is pointless since technology would just do it for you. Why walk or jog of the car can do it for you?
Maybe because these is an obvious benefit of physical exercises and that there are no health benefits to learn a new topic after having already exhausted your brain sitting +7 hours at work?
There are. Unless your work requires almost constant creative reiteration over your mistakes on new topics, learning new things even when exhausted is still healthy for your brain.
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
> bad info becomes apparent, almost immediately Can you elaborate on this? I suspect that you’re thinking mostly of cases in which you already have a fair bit of domain expertise. But in the general case, this seems to be very untrue. Which is why it’s so pernicious that LLMs can generate such quantities of syntactically-plausible-but-factually-untrue text.
Valid point, but I don’t really just start learning whole new vocations, cold. I’m an engineer/software developer, with over 40 years’ experience, and my learning is generally some branch off that (like learning asynchronous programming, or a new UI framework). Can’t really put it into precise terminology, but I get a “gut feeling,” that something is/is not plausible, and it happens pretty quickly; usually when I sta…
But (not speaking about your use specifically here) many people (most, I'd wager) use LLMs for many things beyond their own expertise. And it's there that they're most likely to be ensnared without even knowing it.
I definitely agree with your notion that learning-by-doing is a helpful salve for LLM falsehoods. It's no panacea (working != correct (an incorrect solution can appear correct over a given interval)), but it's a good way of working in general that helps keep LLMs in check. And it's very natural to code or other things that can be immediately applied.
But learning-by-doing of course doesn't work with topics that aren't immediately applied. Which includes lots of topics that people use LLMs for (Wikipedia too, for that matter).
The set of unfamiliar-or-unapplied is practically a lot larger than the set of familiar-or-applied.
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
Valid point, but I don’t really just start learning whole new vocations, cold. I’m an engineer/software developer, with over 40 years’ experience, and my learning is generally some branch off that (like learning asynchronous programming, or a new UI framework). Can’t really put it into precise terminology, but I get a “gut feeling,” that something is/is not plausible, and it happens pretty quickly; usually when I sta…
Sure, I take your point that the smell-test works reasonably well for domains related or adjacent to one's own. But (not speaking about your use specifically here) many people (most, I'd wager) use LLMs for many things beyond their own expertise. And it's there that they're most likely to be ensnared without even knowing it. I definitely agree with your notion that learning-by-doing is a helpful salve for LLM falseho…
I don't think it would be a good idea for me to suddenly decide that I want to get rich, selling antivenin.
Re: Maybe you should learn something
#209Re: Maybe you should learn something
#210It's a very common thing to blame the lack of time and "finding" the extra time by suggesting to give up phone or some other form of procrastination. But in my experience, time is almost never a problem. It's usually: - energy: learning requires much more than the other "bad" activities like phone - correct psychological state: procrastination is typically triggered as a response to anxiety for me, so any learning I…
> It's a very common thing to blame the lack of time and "finding" the extra time by suggesting to give up phone or some other form of procrastination. But in my experience, time is almost never a problem. It's usually (...) uninterrupted time (...)
Let's ignore the semantics nitpicking of trying to make believe that "time" does not reflect "energy" or "correct psychological state". Trying to frame "I don't have uninterrupted time" as something distinct from "I don't have time" is a choice that cannot be explained, let alone justified. I mean, do you honestly believe that setting 10minutes aside each day for a task has the same impact as being able to set aside an hour a week to invest in the same task?
Perhaps it's more productive to focus on the actual problem: not having time.