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

AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

koshyjohn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 656 posts

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#601

Post by manoDev »

lauren_knows wrote: post #536
manoDev wrote: post #521

"Social media should bring people together instead of being used to set them apart." "Economy should improve allocation of resources universally, instead of allowing a handful to hold what many are lacking." And so on... Society has advanced in technology but didn't progress the same way in philosophy.

We're still human, and have human tendencies. I feel like the tools are out there for us to be great, but they certainly gently push us toward being degenerates :/

That's why philosophy (in the original sense of "striving for wisdom") is important. We're thinking animals after all, and can be more than dumb consumers, victims of our instincts.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#602

Post by manoDev »

tombert wrote: post #533
manoDev wrote: post #521

"Social media should bring people together instead of being used to set them apart." "Economy should improve allocation of resources universally, instead of allowing a handful to hold what many are lacking." And so on... Society has advanced in technology but didn't progress the same way in philosophy.

I'm no fan of social media and I'm not even a big fan of capitalism, but isn't this kind of reductive? You can always point out bad things and try and extrapolate that outward. We live in a time with an extremely low murder rate (historically speaking), a very high literacy rate, the ability to keep in touch with family members across the world extremely cheaply, eradication or near-eradication of lots of diseases. I…

Humanity's doom would be failing to recognize how amazing advancements in one area don't necessarily translate to another – not the opposite.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#603

Post by saidAkh »

ori_b wrote: post #519

> and spend more time on the parts of the job that actually matter i.e. framing problems, making tradeoffs, spotting risks, creating clarity, and producing original insight. What makes you think AI won't do those parts of the job? Either AI stops improving, or it will replace thinking.

[flagged]

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#604

Post by d4ng »

Previously everyone was running. Now everyone is on a bicycle. The power each person expends remains approximately the same. The people still running are left behind. The first person to get home after work from running is now the first person to get home after work from cycling.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#605

Post by el_benhameen »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #593
abustamam wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if manual coding becomes "outdated" then there will just be no demand for junior engineers to manually code. People will probably still learn to code manually, just as there are folks who will still build their own furniture. There may just not be a business demand for it. What that means 20-30 years from now when the seniors of today retire if there are no juniors right now is yet to be seen. People say that…

>> What that means 20-30 years from now when the seniors of today retire. I fear that many won't retire and instead completely leave the industry which is already happening. Its anecdotal, but when I first started as a junior dev, I was working with many intermediate devs who had a few years on me. I kept ties with a group of about two dozen devs. We all went through a lot of the same stuff. Last year I attended two…

Out of curiosity, where did those who couldn’t or didn’t want to retire go?

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#606

Post by gwbas1c »

randusername wrote: post #542

In strength training circles there's question of "what are you lifting for ?" For many people the root answer is insecurity. There's nothing inherently wrong with this (you would do a lot worse as an outlet) but you ought to be honest about what lengths you're willing to go to in achieving the appearance of strength since your goal isn't strength itself. Poor form, injury from cutting corners, steroids; these are all…

Another comment in this thread points out that the people having trouble are the ones that previously used to copy & paste stack overflow without understanding it.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#608

Post by aleksiy123 »

luckystarr wrote: post #133

The way I use AI now feels more exhausting than the programming I did for the last 20 years. I pose a problem, then evaluate proposals, then pick the one I think is the "right one"(tm), then see the AI propose a bunch of weird shit, then call it out, refine the proposal until it feels just about right (this is the exhausting part), then let it code the proposal. The coding will then run for 1-5 hours and produce some…

I think it’s because there is a communication and alignment inherently in the process now.

You went to a single entity (you) implementing an idea.

To two entities (agent) + (you) having to align through language.

My metaphor is it’s going from single process (1) to distributed system (2) with all the tradeoffs.

It’s just a whole different problem now that was originally only limited to other teammates.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#610

Post by groos »

tarsinge wrote: post #486
nunez wrote: post #303

> If the job were mainly about producing syntactically valid code, then of course A.I. would be on a direct path to replacing large parts of the profession. But that was never the highest-value part of the work. The value was always in judgment. > The valuable engineer is the one who sees the hidden constraint before it causes an outage. The one who notices that the team is solving the wrong problem. The one who redu…

I dont understand why software engineers insist on keeping the craftsmanship aspect of writing code. Compare to other engineering disciplines, like civil engineering. Engineering was never about going in the field yourself to build things with your own hands. You can become a great civil engineer without building bridges that fail yourself. To me it doesn’t matter that the thing I design is built with a crane or AI.…

A colleague once told me, the difference between software engineering and civil engineering is that they build the same bridge repeatedly while we never build the same thing twice.
Post reply on HN