101–110 of 155 posts
My daughter's a senior in college. She recently was part of a group presentation; she did not use AI to prepare for it, but all of the other group members did. She was the only one who could answer follow-on questions. If you use AI to understand things for you, you're short-changing yourself.
It's the latest form of elitism - like in less sunny countries it's fashionable to be tanned because it means you are rich enough to have time to hang around on the beach while in sunny countries it's fashionable to be light skinned because you are rich enough that you don't have to work in the sun. Disdain for AI is a luxury belief of those who are either talented enough to draw / write / code without or are wealthy…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say it's more like you're not a real driver if you use Waymo to get around everywhere.
Sure, but I'm a software developer, not a typist. A delivery person is still delivering stuff, even if it turns out that using a waymo is cheaper/faster.
I think there are a lot of ICs who may need to re-evaluate what their job actually entails and what they're paid for.
> They are being told, on the one hand, that these tools are going to eliminate millions of jobs, and on the other that they have to use them if they don’t want to fall behind. I'm currently reading a fascinating book called Blood In The Machine° about the Luddites who opposed certain technologies in 19th century England and the parallels with the current state of affairs. It's important to remember that while histor…
Because history is written by the victors, the Luddites were painted as idiots who just hated machines for no reason or dumb reasons. This couldn't be further from the truth.
If the "societal we" don't care to drown in AI-driven slop, the capitalist argument would seem to be a rebirth of local theater, written by no-kidding playwrights and performed by local actors in neighborhood venues.
The "societal we" will have the humanity and art that it demands in the marketplace as consumers, pure and simple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cool thing about critical reasoning is how easy it is to uncover bias or agenda in an article like this. I suspect that as you rely more on a robot for this your own skills will atrophy.
This article is filled with emotional triggers designed to drive engagement. Even the title. It can be hard to separate those things from objective facts. Putting an llm in front of it helps me focus on the facts. There are also too many things to read. My default before llms would have been to ignore this article. At least now I learned some things (mostly about the Gallup poll which had source data) I do think some…
> Putting an llm in front of it helps me focus on the facts.
This argument reminds me of one of Ted Chiang's short stories about "lookism," which (iirc) was a natural preference for people to prefer people who are attractive. In the story, a new technology was developed that could interact with a person's brain to "turn off" their lookism and instead just consider what a person brings to the table without your brain factoring in your own attraction to them.
I won't spoil the story, but a little arms race develops in the technology to "turn off" natural human reactions to things like attraction, emotion in speech, etc., so that users won't be swayed by them in advertising, political campaigns, anything that could possibly have an agenda. By the end, people using the technology are described as highly autistic – unable to perceive any human emotional context, triggers or attraction – so that they're able to interpret just a person's intent and not be manipulated by the underlying motivations.
It's an interesting story, your use of LLMs to cut out the "emotional triggers" from an article and get just the "objective facts" reminds me of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't be doing rEaL woRk unless you're flipping front panel switches to input machine code instructions.
I mean what is real work anyways? Like take finance where people just email broken spreadsheets around all day. If they stop doing that then farmers can't get loans to buy crops which means crops don't get planted and so on-so-forth. Certainly emailing spreadsheets doesn't seem very "real" but there's actual value in providing liquidity it's just not physically demanding. On the flip side, professional sports is very…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because history is written by the victors, the Luddites were painted as idiots who just hated machines for no reason or dumb reasons. This couldn't be further from the truth.
For example, the post-demise advent of Val Kilmer in "As Deep as the Grave" https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/filmmakers-de... could prove a turning point. If the "societal we" don't care to drown in AI-driven slop, the capitalist argument would seem to be a rebirth of local theater, written by no-kidding playwrights and performed by local actors in neighborhood venues. The "societal we" will have the hu…
My daughter's a senior in college. She recently was part of a group presentation; she did not use AI to prepare for it, but all of the other group members did. She was the only one who could answer follow-on questions. If you use AI to understand things for you, you're short-changing yourself.