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

I'm becoming AI-blind

cymerys.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 533 posts

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#201

Post by opem »

TalkingCodeMonk wrote: post #59
causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

The "something deeply wrong" part about AI, that even most technology enthusiasts evidently do not seem to grasp, is that it is still fundamentally a statistical model — an algorithmic construct — and does not possess any real intelligence or critical thought whatsoever. No matter how much investors and tech companies want you to believe that they are on the verge of super intelligence, nothing I've seen to date can…

AI is just a good permutation/combination engine that tries to act smart with help of statistics. At best I only see AI as, 1. An autocomplete on steroid, 2. Good search/correlation engine

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#202

Post by akerl_ »

tptacek wrote: post #114
josefritzishere wrote: post #2

As people rely more on AI they experience cognitive atrophy. This is measurable in IQ loss, and other symptoms we might otherwise associate with early onset dementia or Chronic traumatic encephalopathy.

I'd love to see the cite for people experiencing cognitive atrophy and measured IQ loss from using AI.

I guess we’ll have to see how this affects the results in 2026’s global IQ census.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#203

Post by radicalbyte »

causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

It reads like the white papers companies publish on their websites to build legitimacy. Or anything from those IBM / SAP / Deloitte / etc consultants who write technical papers despite having little to know understanding of the technology.

That's why the business and government people love it, they spend their entire careers reading this nonsense.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#204

Post by opem »

These days all I see is, people on the sending side produce huge amount of AI generated text with zero understanding and the people on the recieveing side feed that same text into some other (or perhaps same) AI to scavenge meaning from it. And they do this so much so, that I some time wonder, if we could invent a high density wire/binary format for AI outputs and enable direct agent to agent communication to save some energy and bandwidth.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#205

Post by [deleted] »

TalkingCodeMonk wrote: post #59
causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

The "something deeply wrong" part about AI, that even most technology enthusiasts evidently do not seem to grasp, is that it is still fundamentally a statistical model — an algorithmic construct — and does not possess any real intelligence or critical thought whatsoever. No matter how much investors and tech companies want you to believe that they are on the verge of super intelligence, nothing I've seen to date can…

[deleted]

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#206

Post by Quarrelsome »

TalkingCodeMonk wrote: post #59
causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

The "something deeply wrong" part about AI, that even most technology enthusiasts evidently do not seem to grasp, is that it is still fundamentally a statistical model — an algorithmic construct — and does not possess any real intelligence or critical thought whatsoever. No matter how much investors and tech companies want you to believe that they are on the verge of super intelligence, nothing I've seen to date can…

> The "something deeply wrong" part about AI, that even most technology enthusiasts evidently do not seem to grasp, is that it is still fundamentally a statistical model — an algorithmic construct — and does not possess any real intelligence or critical thought whatsoever.

I feel like that what a lot of people who say this don't seem to grasp, is that despite this flaw its still often capable of saying more interesting things than a lot of humans. Which says a lot about humans.

Idk something about a mirror maybe and the output reflecting the input?

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#207

Post by josh-sematic »

bluetomcat wrote: post #96
pyridines wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just can't accept that it possesses no intelligence. It is not equivalent to human intelligence, obviously, but how can a system without some semblance of rational thinking solve open math problems? Even composing earlier human work into something novel requires intelligence and understanding on some level.

It has no semantic depth. The sentences and the paragraphs are a statistically viable derivation of existing human text, but once you try to grasp the whole thing with its temporal and spatial dimensions, you are left with a blurry mess that rots your brain. It's a polished, inoffensive and shallow interpretation as written by an opinionated reputation-seeking user of Quora, circa 2019. Assertive, bold, without typos…

Yeah, I hated all those Quora users that would just spew out semantically meaningless slop like increasing an important bound for the Riemann hypothesis.

https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/564f962e60643842f5fcb4a17c9dbc...

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#208

Post by staticman2 »

prophesi wrote: post #195
pyridines wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just can't accept that it possesses no intelligence. It is not equivalent to human intelligence, obviously, but how can a system without some semblance of rational thinking solve open math problems? Even composing earlier human work into something novel requires intelligence and understanding on some level.

I'm guessing whether you believe it possesses intelligence or not depends on your answer to Searle's Chinese room thought experiment[0]. I'd also recommend checking out the Peter Watts' book, Blindsight. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room

This comment thread was started with discussions of AI doing a bad job at a task (communication).

Doesn't the Chinese Room posit an AI good at the task of communication?

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#209

Post by svachalek »

tshaddox wrote: post #188
wongarsu wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We couldn't agree on what intelligence means before ChatGPT happened. Now, agreement on the term seems even further away If performing well on an IQ test or performing at a high level on knowledge work is intelligence to you, these models are intelligent. If intelligence requires sentience for you, then ... well, I don't think we really agree what that is either, never mind how to measure it. But LLMs certainly don't…

I don't think "intelligence" needs to carry all the intrigue and woo of related words like "consciousness" or "creative." If we just use "intelligence" to mean "the ability of a system to solve problems that are new to the system," that pretty much matches the dictionary definition and normal usage of the term. We don't need to touch messy questions like "is there something it's like to be a bat" to conclude that bat…

I agree, but it's clear most people need a definition of intelligence that (1) they qualify for and (2) nothing/no one they don't like qualifies for. And they'll keep redefining intelligence until they satisfy both criteria.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#210

Post by miguel-muniz »

I've been given AI generated documents or presentations and you can always tell when they've just one-shotted the output. Claude has a way of adding so much jargon and unnecessary text to a document that it makes it very hard to read or even understand what the original intent of the writing even was.

I'm not sure why this issue is so prevalent, it's not hard to point Claude at the Wikipedia article on signs of AI writing or ask Claude to write content anyone of the average American reading level could understand.

To me it just gives off a sense of laziness, that you cared so little of your content that you did not take the time to read it yourself and edit it to effectively communicate the message you wanted to communicate. To that point, it's just not worth my time reading, otherwise my eyes glaze over trying to read between the lines of machine written language for other machines.

Post reply on HN