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

Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

ello.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 460 posts

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#441

Post by tekne »

dang wrote: post #48
tekne wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Some 5 year olds could use a gourmet meal. Giving them a mass-produced TV dinner is no different than sedating them with opiates* and pouring garbage on them instead of being a parent." * the more things change the more they stay the same: https://blog.sciencemuseum.org.uk/the-addictive-history-of-m...

" Don't be snarky. " " Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. " Also, please don't use quotation marks to make it look like you're quoting someone when you aren't. That's also an internet snark trope and we're trying to avoid that kind of thing here. p.s. That's an interesting, and heartbreaking, historical link.

Thanks!

Apologies about the tone -- I meant it as a syllogism, not a snark! I'll try to be clearer next time!

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#442

Post by imp0cat »

senordevnyc wrote: post #389
imp0cat wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A 2019 study published in Ophthalmology—the journal of the American Academy of Ophthalmology—offers more evidence that at least part of the worldwide increase in nearsightedness has to do with near work activities. It’s not just screens affecting eye development, it’s also traditional books and the amount of time spent indoors overall. The study also found that spending time outdoors—especially in early childhood—c…

Did you not read my entire comment? I am extremely skeptical that you’d be here leaving this comment about parents “destroying” their kids vision if we were talking about kids and reading paper books. You’re pushing a narrative that screens in particular destroy vision, and it’s bogus. And I haven’t even looked that study up, but I’m guessing the effect size is pretty damn small, so I’m guessing you’re also being hys…

It was you who posted links to the study.

I only pointed out that the study concludes that:

> The kids who spent more time indoors (reading or on their devices) were more likely to get myopia or severe myopia."

You can look up what myopia means. Hint: It has nothing to do with AI, this is about vision.

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#443

Post by cyphar »

slowmovintarget wrote: post #440
cyphar wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard a lot of people argue that phonics are vastly superior to "whole word" techniques, and maybe that's true -- I'm definitely not an expert, though it is how I was taught English in Australia ~30 years ago. However, I find it quite hard to believe that it is the most important cause of the modern literacy rate issues in the US. Why? Because "whole word" teaching was the conventional wisdom since at least the…

Go back to the 18th and 19th centuries and you land back in phonics-land. The fad of whole-word and three-queuing lasted a generation and has produced terrible results. Those techniques even induce dyslexia in some cases.

I am aware of that (the articles I linked even mention it), my point was that modern fears around literacy are based on data suggesting that child literacy rates have recently declined.

If lack of phonics was solely to blame then almost all US adults alive today (not just "a generation" -- anyone born between the 1920s and 2000s, at least) would have literacy problems, but the concern is that today's children have literacy problems in contrast to previous generations -- the exact opposite of what you would expect. To be fair, people in the 1950s were also claiming that children were illiterate compared to previous generations, but I'm not sure whether those claims are really credible. Do your parents' and grandparents' generations strike you as being shockingly illiterate?

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#444

Post by lern_too_spel »

forgetfreeman wrote: post #439
lern_too_spel wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Studies consistently show declines in every trackable metric associated with education when computational devices are introduced to the process. They're doing it wrong, just as the incentives in the classroom are wrong (to increase a number showing how many children meet some artificially low standard of competency). The rational debate comes from the hundreds of people who are doing it right on their own. These da…

I look forward to your nomination for Secretary of Education since you appear to have a handle on something trained professionals on two continents backed by billion dollar industries have failed to master.

I already told you that their incentives are wrong. Meanwhile, the people training the elite in any field use computers extensively and have been doing so for years.

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#445

Post by altmanaltman »

Marha01 wrote: post #277
altmanaltman wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sure you must have been to many developing countries to make that statement and are not just talking out of your behind. But the ground reality is that they don't lack tutors or educators. They lack classrooms, they lack infrastrucutre, they lack nutrition. Solving those problems will actually incrase literacy in the world, not an AI bot.

> But the ground reality is that they don't lack tutors or educators. As someone from a developing country: you are wrong. Lack of teachers (and especially GOOD teachers) is a big issue. Lack of infrastructure is also an issue, though.

You think I'm not from a developing country and just astroturfing these comments? Children need nutrition and infrastructure. If you develop the two, GOOD teachers will also come from the system. If you put an AI chatbot in an Indian school in a village which does not have water security or proper nutrition for kids or lack of proper school buildings, you think it'll change things because kids can talk to an LLM?

Infrastructure is THE issue. If we solve it, we can solve the teachers issue as well (i.e. finding GOOD teachers) but we already do not lack when it comes to teachers in numbers. This AI bot thing is bullshit western posturing that ignores the ground problems and is trying to make money off poverty. Look through the lines and what they are saying.

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#446

Post by senordevnyc »

imp0cat wrote: post #442
senordevnyc wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you not read my entire comment? I am extremely skeptical that you’d be here leaving this comment about parents “destroying” their kids vision if we were talking about kids and reading paper books. You’re pushing a narrative that screens in particular destroy vision, and it’s bogus. And I haven’t even looked that study up, but I’m guessing the effect size is pretty damn small, so I’m guessing you’re also being hys…

It was you who posted links to the study. I only pointed out that the study concludes that: > The kids who spent more time indoors (reading or on their devices) were more likely to get myopia or severe myopia." You can look up what myopia means. Hint: It has nothing to do with AI, this is about vision.

Exactly, the study has nothing to do with AI, and yet you’re here pushing a narrative that AI / screens destroy vision in some unique way. You wouldn’t comment about books.

But this thread couldn’t be less interesting, so I’m out.

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#447

Post by dredmorbius »

zeroCalories wrote: post #438
dang wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turning this into a nationalistic flamewar is an additional road to hell that we did not need. This thread was bad enough without it. Please don't post like this to HN again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html (p.s. and yes of course we would say exactly the same thing if it were your country someone was slurring)

Hi can you please delete my account? I'm trying to quit posting on social media

Generally, email such requests to mods: hn@ycombinator.com

See: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html> (end of FAQ).

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#448

Post by atmavatar »

senordevnyc wrote: post #398
atmavatar wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reaction is based on 3 unproven assertions: * An AI tutor is a net positive in learning for the subject matter it covers. * An AI tutor does not cause other harms. * An AI tutor is going to be cheap enough that someone who cannot afford a human tutor will still be able to afford an AI tutor. I'm mostly willing to give the benefit of the doubt on the first point, but the third point seems unlikely, and history ha…

The second one feels like a subset of the first. If it’s net positive, the other harms are worth it. And I don’t think you’re really engaging with what they said, which is that it might be better than nothing , which is what is realistically available to many kids. Do you really think something like this is worse than nothing ?

I limited the first point to specifically deal with learning the subject matter, but I added the second point to account for any negative externalities which may fall outside that.

A small (contrived) example: a child uses an AI tutor because they're falling behind in mathematics. The tutor does an excellent job at getting the child back up to speed and improving his/her grades in math, but the child then starts becoming dependent on AI tutors for all subjects because they've either lost interest or capability for self-learning.

We've already seen a study or two indicate extended use of AI coding agents causes some people to lose their own coding ability over time, making them dependent upon the agents. It doesn't seem far-fetched that children could become dependent upon AI tutors in a similar fashion.

That's not to mention that AI tutors require children to have computer access, which would ultimately cement in place school laptop programs I was under the impression were neutral to net negative in and of themselves.

So yes, in short, I think AI tutors have the potential to be worse than nothing. I'm not asserting they are, but I'd like to see some studies done on the topic before rolling them out for children en masse.

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#449

Post by naishoya »

liendolucas wrote: post #436
naishoya wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's simple for parents - be the human tutor they need. If you're capable of loving them and being responsible for raising them, that task fall to you. Underprivileged by socioeconomic realities? In the US there is Head Start for this problem, and yes, it does work and has been longitudinally proven to do so by independent studies and peer reviewed publication. In a nation without these services, but able to be here…

What on earth are you talking about??? I didn't get a single coherent idea from any sentence/paragraph. Shame on me? Shame on you for not being concise, synthetic and to the point.

Here's are a few links to several resources about the state of safety at the frontier LLM models' companies of origin. The first uses shorter sentences and has further supporting links.

Hopefully those with provide you with an easier to comprehend, "synthetic" (sic) measurement of the risks that are unavoidable in the 'product' under consideration.

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/320191/20260711/openai-lo...

TLDR; the safety at every commercial LLM scores at or below a C+. I don't believe anyone serious can honestly believe that the founders of this 'product' are capable of reinforcing security that does not exist in any of the models they may choose to utilize.

https://futureoflife.org/ai-safety-index-summer-2026/

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/318351/20260614/chatgpt-f...

Hope this helps.

Also, the "Shame on you" statement was directed exclusively at the founders of this product and people who would intentionally expose children in their stewardship to these dangers.

If that is not you, then my honest apologies if it seemed directed at you. That was not my intent.

If that includes you, and you couldn't grok the concepts in my rant; we have nothing more to talk about.

Re: Building a real-time AI tutor for 5-year-olds

#450

Post by antilimit »

this whole thread has been massively interesting to read through. people are always going to lean different directions and will choose different things for their kids regardless. I think having more options and tools is not likely ever a bad thing right? the ones that "work" will survive and last..
Post reply on HN