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

Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

media.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 529 posts

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#451

Post by Kamq »

vidarh wrote: post #270
Kamq wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My "actual job" isn't to write code, but to solve problems. Yes, and there's often a benefit to having a human have an understanding of the concrete details of the system when you're trying to solve problems. > That has increasingly shifted to "just" reviewing code It takes longer to read code than to write code if you're trying to get the same level of understanding. You're gaining time by building up an understan…

> It takes longer to read code than to write code if you're trying to get the same level of understanding. You're gaining time by building up an understanding deficit. That works for a while, but at some point you have to go burn the time to understand it. This is true whether an AI wrote the code or a co-worker, except the AI is always on hand to answer detailed questions about the code, do detailed analysis, and ru…

> This is true whether an AI wrote the code or a co-worker

I agree. I just don't think code reviews are as load bearing as everyone seems to think. They're important, but not nearly enough.

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#452

Post by coldtea »

inglor_cz wrote: post #404
coldtea wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My "actual job" isn't to write code, but to solve problems Solve enough problems relying on AI writing the code as a black box, and over time your grasp of coding will worsen, and you wont be undestanding what the AI should be doing or what it is doing wrong - not even at the architectural level, except in broad strokes. One ends like the clueless manager type who hasn't touched a computer in 30 years. At which poi…

It is not that clear to me. Let us use an analogy. Many (most?) people can tell a well-written book or story from a mediocre or a terrible one, even though the vast majority of the readers hasn't written any in their lives. To distinguish good from bad doesn't necessarily require the ability to create.

This analogy serves my argument, as in it, just like "most people" are mere readers (not just they're not writers, they're also nowhere near the level of a competent book editor or a critic), the programmer becomes a mere user of the end program.

Not only would this be a bad way of running a publishing business regarding writing and editing (working on the level of understanding of "most people"), but even in the best case of it being workable, the publisher (or software company) can just fire the specialist and get some average readers/users to give a thumbs up or down to whatever it churns.

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#453

Post by lazide »

cstrahan wrote: post #445
lazide wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hahaha, oh boy. that is roughly as useful or accurate as saying that all machines are just combinations of other machines, and hence there is nothing unique about any machine.

Vertical CNC mills and CNC lathes are, obviously, different machines with different use cases. But if you compare within the categories, the designs are almost all conceptually the same. So, what about outside of some set of categories? Well, generally, no such thing exists: new ideas are extremely rare. Anyone who truly enjoys entering code character for character, refusing to use refactoring tools (e.g. rename symb…

Sounds like she doth protest too much?

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#454

Post by wisty »

throwup238 wrote: post #405
wisty wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Soapbox time. They were arguably right. Pre literate peole could memorise vast texts (Homer's work, Australian Aboriginal songlines). Pre Gutenberg, memorising reasonably large texts was common. See, e.g. the book Memory Craft. We're becoming increasingly like the Wall E people, too lazy and stupid to do anything without our machines doing it for us, as we offload increasing amounts onto them. And it's not even that…

> They were arguably right. Pre literate peole could memorise vast texts (Homer's work, Australian Aboriginal songlines). Pre Gutenberg, memorising reasonably large texts was common. See, e.g. the book Memory Craft. > We're becoming increasingly like the Wall E people, too lazy and stupid to do anything without our machines doing it for us, as we offload increasing amounts onto them. You're right about the first part…

Economists suggest we are in many ways no more productive now than when Homer Simpson could buy a house and raise a family on a single income - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity_paradox

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#455

Post by wisty »

nindalf wrote: post #224
wisty wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Soapbox time. They were arguably right. Pre literate peole could memorise vast texts (Homer's work, Australian Aboriginal songlines). Pre Gutenberg, memorising reasonably large texts was common. See, e.g. the book Memory Craft. We're becoming increasingly like the Wall E people, too lazy and stupid to do anything without our machines doing it for us, as we offload increasing amounts onto them. And it's not even that…

> Homer Simpson I can't stress this enough, Homer Simpson is a fictional character from a cartoon. I would not use him in an argument about economics any more than I would use the Roadrunner to argue for road safety.

I also cited more serious analysis.

Yeah, Homer Simpson is fictional, a unionised blue-collar worker with specialised skills, and he lives in a small town.

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#456

Post by BigPaPaYEAAA »

alchemism wrote: post #384
coldtea wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My "actual job" isn't to write code, but to solve problems Solve enough problems relying on AI writing the code as a black box, and over time your grasp of coding will worsen, and you wont be undestanding what the AI should be doing or what it is doing wrong - not even at the architectural level, except in broad strokes. One ends like the clueless manager type who hasn't touched a computer in 30 years. At which poi…

Yet most organizations in existence pay the people “who hasn’t touched a computer in 30 years” quite a large amount of money to continue to solve problems, for some inscrutable reason… =)

[dead]

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#457

Post by MagicMoonlight »

wisty wrote: post #160
sdoering wrote: post #111

This reminds me of the recurring pattern with every new medium: Socrates worried writing would destroy memory, Gutenberg's critics feared for contemplation, novels were "brain softening," TV was the "idiot box." That said, I'm not sure "they've always been wrong before" proves they're wrong now. Where I'm skeptical of this study: - 54 participants, only 18 in the critical 4th session - 4 months is barely enough time…

Soapbox time. They were arguably right. Pre literate peole could memorise vast texts (Homer's work, Australian Aboriginal songlines). Pre Gutenberg, memorising reasonably large texts was common. See, e.g. the book Memory Craft. We're becoming increasingly like the Wall E people, too lazy and stupid to do anything without our machines doing it for us, as we offload increasing amounts onto them. And it's not even that…

There are still people that memorise the entire Quran word for word.

But it’s a complete waste of time. What is the point spending years memorising a book?

You seem like the kind of person that would still be eating rotten carcasses on the plains while the rest of us are sitting around a fire.

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#458

Post by discreteevent »

rob wrote: post #339
vidarh wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did. Did you read the comment you replied to?

Just curious, are these articles on your "blog" written by AI or are you writing them all by hand? https://hokstadconsulting.com/blog Very impressive daily output! Keep up the good work.

3 blogs a day, including Christmas day. Impressive indeed!

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#459

Post by carbine »

I skimmed this but am I reading correctly, participants were given 20 minutes to write an essay and asked to do their best and then given (or not given) access to a tool to help? There's zero incentive here not to optimize for shortcuts and task completion.

This is very different from, say, writing an essay I'm gonna publish on my blog under my own name. I would be MUCH more interested in an experiment that isolates people working on highly cognitively demanding work that MATTERS to them, and seeing what impact LLMs do (or don't) have on cognitive function. Otherwise, this seems like a study designed to confirm a narrative.

What am I missing

Re: Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant

#460

Post by 0dayz »

yomismoaqui wrote: post #150
0dayz wrote: post #144

It's a bit tiring seeing these extreme positions on Ai sticking out time and time again, Ai is not some cure all for code stagnation or creating products nor is it destroying productivity. It's a tool, and this study at most indicates that we don't use as much brain power for the specific tasks of coding but do they look into for instance maintenance or management of code? As that is what you'll be relegated to when…

Lukewarm opinions on the Internet? Where do you think we are...? We only deal in aboslutes here.

Oh crap you're right.

Ai is not a tool, you the developer is!

Post reply on HN