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

Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

artfish.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 512 posts

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#471

Post by ClikeX »

ssl-3 wrote: post #322
ClikeX wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that’s like teachers saying “you won’t always have a calculator They were right, though. For one, you still need to now what kind of equation to put into the calculator. If you don't know the concepts, what are you going to calculate. Real life situations don't actually spell out neat textbook questions. And just take a look throughout the day how many quick maths you do subconsciously. Just things like cooking or…

> They were right, though. They were not. I'm not dead yet so I suppose there's still a chance, but so far in decades of living life I've always had calculators when I've needed them. > For one, you still need to now what kind of equation to put into the calculator. That's a very different construct. Math concepts don't care how the arithmetic is performed. > If you don't know the concepts, what are you going to calc…

I feel like you missed the point I was trying to make.

Sure, a teacher framing the necessity of learning math as "you don't always have calculator" is pretty lazy answer that doesn't really get to the point. In my experience, teachers rarely even made this point, students did that tried to argue that Mathematics was pointless when you have calculators.

But my point was that actually knowing these concepts is good for complex reasoning you can do in all aspects of life. Whether you have the calculator with you or not.

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#472

Post by slibhb »

beej71 wrote: post #430
mapontosevenths wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once read Ben Franklin's autobiography. I have yet to experience any great blossoming of our relationship. More seriously, the novel is a unidirectional medium of communication. Not a relationship. That said, it is meant to convey a perspective. I don't care if it's a human, a robot, or a little green man's perspective. It just has to be an interesting, useful, or enlightening perspective that I didn't already shar…

> I once read Ben Franklin's autobiography. I have yet to experience any great blossoming of our relationship. I've also read it, and got to know the man that much better. It especially added a great deal of texture to the experience of visiting his home site, his church, and his grave. I'd argue that humans rarely have unique perspectives, being highly influenced by their environment and experience. And have we not…

When you read a book, you hypothesize a writer and have some kind of inner relationship with the hypothetical writer. But it's not a real relationship. It's in the words, not outside them.

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#473

Post by ben_w »

im3w1l wrote: post #334
ben_w wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say "the next version of Stockfish". You have Stockfish version n, see board state s. I have Stockfish version n, see board state s. I want to know what you're about to do, so I put Stockfish into state s, ask it what the best move is, and I know you'll make that move because I know you'll ask Stockfish version n the same question of the same state. I now know board state s+1. The steps are not pre-programme…

Your whole strategy basically involves having more compute than the other guy so you can look one step further. And yeah in an AI world having more compute or some exclusive data seem like obvious ways to get a leg up.

Yes.

Have you met most people?

Most people won't bother, find this kind of thought process to be somewhere between nerdy and paranoid.

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#474

Post by mapontosevenths »

beej71 wrote: post #430
mapontosevenths wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once read Ben Franklin's autobiography. I have yet to experience any great blossoming of our relationship. More seriously, the novel is a unidirectional medium of communication. Not a relationship. That said, it is meant to convey a perspective. I don't care if it's a human, a robot, or a little green man's perspective. It just has to be an interesting, useful, or enlightening perspective that I didn't already shar…

> I once read Ben Franklin's autobiography. I have yet to experience any great blossoming of our relationship. I've also read it, and got to know the man that much better. It especially added a great deal of texture to the experience of visiting his home site, his church, and his grave. I'd argue that humans rarely have unique perspectives, being highly influenced by their environment and experience. And have we not…

> I think the words are just a medium for thoughts. AI only produces the former, not the latter.

I think this is exactly what I was trying to say above when I talked about perspective Reading is a form of telepathy, and there's just nothing INSIDE of most AI writing today. When that changes, I'll take it more seriously. I do suspect that it will very soon though.

As you say, AI's are already coming up with novel math and I've seen some glimmers of purely mechanical brilliance in the writing already.

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#475

Post by mapontosevenths »

confidantlake wrote: post #402
mapontosevenths wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once read Ben Franklin's autobiography. I have yet to experience any great blossoming of our relationship. More seriously, the novel is a unidirectional medium of communication. Not a relationship. That said, it is meant to convey a perspective. I don't care if it's a human, a robot, or a little green man's perspective. It just has to be an interesting, useful, or enlightening perspective that I didn't already shar…

Ah I always felt like novels were a partnership in a way. He is putting down words and I am using that to create a world in my mind. 2 people reading the same novel are creating 2 different worlds.

I've always been fond of calling it telepathy. That's really what it is. Further, it can even let us see into the minds of the long dead. Humanities superpower is that it is the only race which can preserve knowledge beyond a single lifespan.

With LLM's we can also now preserve actual thought patterns and skills beyond a single lifespan. I can't wait to see what the future brings.

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#476

Post by bitwize »

rmunn wrote: post #417
bitwize wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it's not really a mechsuit; inasmuch as it is, it's more like an Evangelion: it's got bits of people's souls floating around in there; it only works well with a high synch rate with the user, which is difficult to achieve consistently; and sometimes it pops off and does its own thing anyway. And the way you achieve and maintain deep knowledge of the shape of the output you want is... well, to write and test it…

That Evangelion analogy is a good one. I don't necessarily agree with all of it (for example, I think the high synch rate is the weakest part of the analogy, and LLMs can be used as tools with some decent success without needing to plunge into them too deeply), but every piece of it can be coherently argued for (for example, perhaps I'm missing an even higher threshold of success that I could achieve with a higher "s…

"Synch rate" is roughly "you know how to manipulate the model to get it to do precisely what you want". This is nonobvious even for open-weights models and can change as new models are published, often under the same name as the old models.

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#477

Post by [deleted] »

kakacik wrote: post #445
dTal wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels more like a BMX bike to me. The quality of what I get out seems to be a direct function of what I put in. The threshold of what I can achieve is raised slightly, the speed with which I can achieve it is raised quite a lot - but it's not a magic rocket ship that whisks me to far off hostile environments and protects me while I'm there. I'm still "naked". The code is still mine, and I can get off the bike at a…

Thats... not how most of the world is using llms. Students are getting measurably dumber (as in lacking actual topic understanding, since actually learning sonething properly is much harder than shallow knowledge), every other day I read about somebody losing their wealth due to listening to llms with finances. Other recent articles - psychologists start seeing people losing their uniqueness and many people slowly ve…

[deleted]

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#478

Post by Otterly99 »

ericfr11 wrote: post #185
ElProlactin wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you knew how the modern music industry and local diners work, you might not be so impressed. It's not all artisanal, made with love goodness just because human hands did it.

But the AI would not be able to perform live on a stage, producing emotions. I can't imagine staying 3 hours in a crowded room looking at a robot or a computer screen, even if it produces great music. Or if we get to that point, what gives the right and permission for humans to exist anymore?

May I introduce you to vocaloid concerts?

Re: Are we offloading too much of our thinking to AI?

#480

Post by shimman »

wcedmisten wrote: post #337
planb wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure it’s so simple. I went on a trip with friends this weekend and cut a video from all the short clips we filmed on our phones. Before AI I would have used some song from my music library as the background tune. This time I created a song with Suno that fits the clips and includes some funny anecdotes from our vacation. If I was very talented and had the time, I could have written the lyrics and recorded th…

I don't get how people can listen to and share AI generated "music" and not feel legitimately embarrassed to their core. Like the AI Charlie Kirk song, but unironically. I'm truly baffled how anyone can enjoy it. > If I was very talented and had the time, I could have written the lyrics and recorded the song myself (which undoubtedly would be even more awesome), but I can’t do this. I promise you that any art you pro…

You have to remember that the vast majority of tech workers have open disdain towards humans and share zero solidarity with their fellow workers.

Just look at the leadership of tech workers, some of the most deeply anti-human and anti-democratic people on the planet. Not hard to see how these terrible people rub off of their workers.

Post reply on HN