Live data from Hacker News

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

media.mit.edu

471–480 of 529 posts

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

#471
post #66

Druids used to decry that literacy caused people to lose their ability to memorize sacred teachings. And they’re right! But literacy still happened and we’re all either dumber or smarter for it.

It's more complex than that. The three pillars of learning are theory (finding out about the thing), practice (doing the thing) and metacognition (being right, or more importantly, wrong. And correcting yourself.). Each of those steps reinforce neural pathways. They're all essential in some form or another. Literacy, books, saving your knowledge somewhere else removes the burden of remembering everything in your head…

I feel as though this analysis only makes sense in hindsight; in the past, when people used to say using books as a way to store knowledge outside your brain would make a similar argument, but would add a fourth pillar of memorization. Even now, a lot of people in different professions (such as law, and medicine) still absolutely drill memorization as the first step in building a strong knowledge base before getting into more practical, day-to-day used information. When people are forced to memorize a large amount of things in a cohesive subject, it forces your brain to make connections between ideas out of necessity to keep the information in your head. This definitely has an effect on metacognition and practice. So I wouldn't argree with you that the analogy with books=brain rot isn't valid.

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

#472
post #231
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…

> Pre literate peole could memorise vast texts It seems more likely that there were only a handful of people who could. There still are a handful of people who can, and they are probably even better than in the olden times [1] (for example because there are simply more people now than back then.) [1] https://oberlinreview.org/35413/news/35413/ (random first link from Google)

Yes, there is some actual technique to learn and then with moderate practice it's possible to accurately memorize surprisingly long passages, especially if they have any consistent structure. Reasonable enough to guess that this is a normally distributed skill, talent, domain of expertise.

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

#473
post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

I don’t care if “we” are more productive and I certainly don’t care what western economists think about pre-industrial agriculture. I care that the two billion people living in households dependent on subsistence farming have a better quality of life than they did before the internet or mobile phones, which they undeniably have. That much was obvious fifteen to twenty years ago when mobile networks were rolling out all over over Africa en masse and every village I visited on my continental roadtrip had at least one mobile phone that everybody shared to get weather forecasts and coordinate trips to the nearest market town.

Anyone in a developed country who bases their opinions on the effects of technology on their and their friends’ social media addictions is a complete fool. Life has gotten so much better for BILLIONS of people in the last few decades that it’s not even a remotely nuanced issue.

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

#474
post #327

I'm still not a huge user of AI assisted stuff, although lately I have been using Google's AI summaries a lot. I've been writing cloudformation templates and trying to figure out how to bridge resources/policies together.

That's wild. Google's AI summaries are so frequently wrong . I hope you understand that you're getting bad info and not knowing which bits are bad.

I mean in this case it's pretty quick to tell that it's not right, try sam deploy and it fails, but for the most part it's working, it seems straight out of AWS's docs

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

#475
post #98

This seems to confirm my feeling when using AI too much. It's easy to get started, but I can feel my brain engaging less with the problem than I'm used to. It can form a barrier to real understanding, and keeps me out of my flow. I recently worked on something very complex I don't think I would have been able to tackle as quickly without AI; a hierarchical graph layout algorithm based on the Sugiyama framework, using…

>but I can feel my brain engaging less with the problem than I'm used to

With me it has been the opposite, perhaps because I was anti-AI before and because I know it is gonna make mistake.

My most intense AI usage:

Goal: Homelab is my hobby and I wanted to setup a private tracker torrent via Proton VPN, fully.

I am used to tools such Ansible and Linux operating system, but there were like 3 different tools to manage the torrents, plus a bunch of firewall rules so in case Provon VPN drops, everything stops working instead of using my real IP Address snitching me to my ISP.

I wanted everything to be as automated as possible, Ansible, so if everything catches on fire, I can run Ansible playbook and bring everything back online.

The whole setup took me 3 nights and I couldn't stop thinking about it during the day, like how can I solve this or that, the solution Perplexity/ChatGPT gave me broke something else so how could I solve that, etc.

I am using these tools more like a Google Search alternative than AI per se, I can see when it made mistakes because I know what I am asking it to help me with, homelab. I don't wanna to just copy and paste, and ironically, I have learned a ton about Promox ( where I run my virtual containers and virtual machine ). I always say that I don't wanna just answers, show me how did you get to that conclusion so I can learn it myself.

As long as you are aware that this is a tool and that it makes mistakes the same way as somebody's reply in any forum, you are good and should still feel motivated.

If you are using AI tools just for copy/paste expecting things to work without caring to understand what is actually happening (companies and IT teams worldwide), then you have a big problem.

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

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a fan of "TL;DR" but I think 52 minutes would qualify. I jumped to a random point of the transcript and found just platitudes, which didn't quite hook me into listening to all of it. How about some more info on what their main conclusions are?

They view the framing of the MIT paper not just as bad science, but as a dangerous social tool that uses brain data to "consign people" to being less worthy or "stupid" for using cognitive aids. It flags the paper's alarmist findings as "pseudoscience" designed to provoke fear rather than provide rigorous insight. They highlight several "red flags" in the study's design: lack of a coherent scientific framework, metho…

> as a dangerous social tool that uses brain data to "consign people" to being less worthy or "stupid" for using cognitive aids

> ableist rhetoric

Oh, so it's not actually a science podcast - it's anti-science ideological propaganda. Thanks for the heads-up.

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

#477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's never been a case in my long programming career so far where knowing the low level details has not benefited me. The level of value varies but it is always positive. When you use LLMs to write all your code you will lose (or never learn) the details. Your decision making will not be as good.

This is true. However, your ability to write specs and validate requirements before starting to build will increase. It’s just trading deep hand-on expertise for deep product/spec expertise. No different than how riding the bus all the time instead of driving results in different skill development (assuming productive time on the bus).

I think there is a big difference. You could and should have both knowledge. This applies to whether you're a lowly programmer or a CEO. Knowing the details will always help you make better decisions.

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

#478
post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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… =)

There is a track now for people to stay in engineering and get paid more then their manager

That "track" gets increasingly illusory the farther you walk it.

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

#479

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…

To be fair, writing did destroy memory. It's just that in the very long summer of writing, which may now be coming to an end thanks to AI, we have considered the upside more than worth it.

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

#480

I encourage folks to listen to brilliant psychologist for software teams Cat Hicks [1] and her wife, teaching neuroscientist Ashley Juavinett [2] on their excellent podcast, Change, Technically discussing the myriad problems with this study: https://www.buzzsprout.com/2396236/episodes/17378968 1: https://www.catharsisinsight.com 2: https://ashleyjuavinett.com

Thank you for that link. That's rare not to be disappointed by a podcast. The level of chit chat is tolerable in my opinion, and the offered insights seem legit.

My guess is the commenters who didn't like it had other reasons than the content itself.

Post reply on HN