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

221–230 of 512 posts

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

#221

Post by beej71 »

slibhb wrote: post #197
dml2135 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I could not disagree with this more. What’s valuable about a novel is the social relationships it fosters, both in relation to the author, and also all the others that have read it. I read a book to better understand what other people are thinking, how they see the world — both directly from the author, and indirectly, in discovering what other readers may have found valuable. I can maybe understand finding valu…

It seems to me that you don't like reading (which is fine). Some people enjoy reading words strung together in a certain way. The value comes from the simple relationship between the text and the reader, not on some kind of social connection.

It seems to be that you don't appreciate the relationship between the author and the reader and the author and the text, which is fine, but is a bit tragic.

Not that I doubt that one day people will simply gather around the AI infinite story creation bot. They just won't know what they're missing. :(

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

#222

Post by saulpw »

smoothbraindev wrote: post #141
saulpw wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm working on this! https://magworld.pw

This is really cool! After entering the software field, I felt uncomfortable not having a sense of relative size while working with digital storage units. Piece of mind was achieved after sitting down and mapping the units (Gb, Mb, etc) to common artifacts(audio file, plain text, database). I've been planning forever to do something similar with length, duration, power, etc.

That's basically what we're doing! I'd be curious if it helps you. Send me an email if you wind up listening to or reading anything from the site.

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

#223

Post by platevoltage »

slibhb wrote: post #80
zerobees wrote: post #40

I don't know if this is a good framing. "Too much" is subjective, and every heavy AI user will assert that they're just unlocking their potential, that calculators didn't make us dumber, etc. But to latch onto the calculator argument: if you outsource adding numbers to a calculator, you're still you. On the flip side, if you use an LLM do most of your thinking, what's left? We have people here who use LLMs to raise t…

> In my mind, it's pretty simple: I'm a human, LLMs are not. If a human writes a novel, it's inherently worth more. While I appreciate you laying it out so plainly, I disagree. A novel is a bunch of words and I don't care if they were written by one person, five, an AI, or infinite monkeys on typewriters. What's valuable in a novel (or a poem) is in the words.

Completely untrue. Stephen King has a loyal following. These same people aren't going to pick up a generic scary book written by a machine. This goes for music as well.

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

#224

Post by pton_xd »

slibhb wrote: post #80
zerobees wrote: post #40

I don't know if this is a good framing. "Too much" is subjective, and every heavy AI user will assert that they're just unlocking their potential, that calculators didn't make us dumber, etc. But to latch onto the calculator argument: if you outsource adding numbers to a calculator, you're still you. On the flip side, if you use an LLM do most of your thinking, what's left? We have people here who use LLMs to raise t…

> In my mind, it's pretty simple: I'm a human, LLMs are not. If a human writes a novel, it's inherently worth more. While I appreciate you laying it out so plainly, I disagree. A novel is a bunch of words and I don't care if they were written by one person, five, an AI, or infinite monkeys on typewriters. What's valuable in a novel (or a poem) is in the words.

> A novel is a bunch of words

> What's valuable in a novel (or a poem) is in the words.

Even if the words are a lie? Misleading? False?

I'm not even talking about LLMs. What if it's propaganda designed to influence your thinking, possibly against your own interests; are those still valuable words that you'd cherish reading?

My point is that the source matters, intent matters, and authenticity matters. To me, anyway.

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

#225

Post by beej71 »

ericfr11 wrote: post #176
dml2135 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I could not disagree with this more. What’s valuable about a novel is the social relationships it fosters, both in relation to the author, and also all the others that have read it. I read a book to better understand what other people are thinking, how they see the world — both directly from the author, and indirectly, in discovering what other readers may have found valuable. I can maybe understand finding valu…

What if the original idea/concept was from a human, who used an LLM to extend and write the book?

For me in that case, I'd value the story but not the writing. I want to know that a human has had the experience of writing what I am having the experience reading.

If I find out after the fact that an AI wrote it, the writing becomes bland, like a magic trick exposed.

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

#226

Post by platevoltage »

Sindisil wrote: post #52

I'm not personally, since I don't use GenAI at all. Especially given the comments I see here and on other tech and programming forums, I hate the direction things are going. I still have some hope this will all fade, but the damage done will be worse the longer it goes on, I think.

The way I look at it is that if I wasn't on HN, I would just assume the entire industry was 100% on board with all of this. There is a more than fair amount of pushback on this forum, which gives me a little bit of hope.

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

#227

Post by contextfree »

AnEro wrote: post #6

When I use a calculator, I atleast try to get with in a few digits of what I think the anwser is in my head. Mostly since when I was younger I had a very passionate teacher about how much slower everyone is now because of calculators on simple math. I just apply the same thing with LLMs, just try and think of how and what I would have said and see how close I was. Only thing I change is I don't trust the anwsers and…

Yeah, I've always tried to train myself to do calculations in my head as much as reasonably possible when learning about mathematical objects, etc. Like when I was learning linear algebra I made myself invert 4x4 matrices in my head. (Pen and paper is also cheating!) Calculators and computers have been better than me at this sort of thing for my entire life, so in some sense this isn't a change?

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

#228

Post by barnacs »

Aurornis wrote: post #128
zerobees wrote: post #40

I don't know if this is a good framing. "Too much" is subjective, and every heavy AI user will assert that they're just unlocking their potential, that calculators didn't make us dumber, etc. But to latch onto the calculator argument: if you outsource adding numbers to a calculator, you're still you. On the flip side, if you use an LLM do most of your thinking, what's left? We have people here who use LLMs to raise t…

> Many LLM maximalists say they use the tech to learn new things, but to what effect? Are you going to apply that knowledge of physics or computer science yourself, or will you just prompt the LLM again? We had some contractors at the house doing some work. The contractors had been doing this work for a long time. I could tell they were good at what they did because I had some experience with that type of work when I…

Similar to your contractor example, I like to think of the useful way to use LLMs as doing "grep -C" (show lines surrounding the match).

You provide some context you are looking to expand on and let the LLM autocomplete provide you with relevant terms and concepts that have historically come up in that context and may or may not be actually useful. Then you do due diligence to learn about those related concepts, determine their applicability and distill it all down into a solution.

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

#229

Post by platevoltage »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #144

I've been doing computer stuff all my life. I am learning the construction trades now. LLMs help you learn the rules for doing weird and specific stuff in the trades. One of my favorite LLM prompts is for plumbing tasks. For example: I have 1" pex b and I need to convert to a typical 1/4" RO connection line, what fittings on supplyhouse.com should I buy? So much easier than standing in Home Depot in the plumbing aisl…

I think the way I use AI for software development isn't too different from the way you do. I use it primarily as a research tool. I admit it's making me weaker at sifting through documentation, but I am still writing the bulk of my code myself, and whatever the LLM writes for me, I apply my own style to it.

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

#230

Post by contextfree »

lbrito wrote: post #45

The post is illustrated by a picture of handwritten notes, like that was supposed to shock the reader or something. I find this aesthetic tiring, and it usually comes from AI-maxxers. To me its saying: look at this quaint relic of the past, bereft of day-to-day utility, replaced by superior technology. Its life is now only as a symbol of a time where people actually used their brains.

I still take a lot of handwritten notes? Sometimes while using AI even
Post reply on HN