I just got called out by a programmer who uses AI who was furious and wrote "students cheat, always have, tell us something we don't already know". I responded: "did you read the MIT paper or the other link?" Of course he didn't: TL/DR, which proves my point. Even the programmer admitted he has to check the AI's work.
The point here is *those who received real educations can use AI because they know enough to double-check it, but the kids using AI as a substitute for real learning will never develop this capacity.*
Those who actually have mastery can use AI and not realize the point I'm making isn't that AI is useless, the point is it fatally undermines real learning and thinking.
The MIT paper is 206 pages long, the last section being the stats of the research, but the points it makes are truly important. Charles
You have once again well illustrated the problem. Those old enough to remember the advent of calculators have seen this before. The key is to make certain that people learn how to learn. First focus on a love for reading(read to your children every night). Then teach the proper method of reading. Then make certain that they can do basic math in their head. Next comes critical thinking. Appeals to authority are not to be trusted. Think through the actions and their consequences. Of course, the so called "educational" system is not designed to actually educate. Its meant to indoctrinate, force conformity and submission to "authority". In the process it warps and distorts most peoples minds. Making then good little cogs for the corporate machines, and cannon fodder for the Empires endless wars. So called "AI" will simply be more of the same.
Make no mistake, they are very useful tools within their narrow applications. But they should never be trusted for mission critical work.
As George Carlin said years ago, "The government doesn't want critical thinkers. Just workers smart enough to run the machinery and do the office work. They don't want Americans to talk about how they are being fucked by a red, white, and blue dick every day."
This ties in with a personal observation – feel free to correct me if it's not scientifically accurate – about people with mental health issues, specifically people with schizophrenia (I know at least two people with this condition), but perhaps also people with other conditions. They are known to function relatively well during periods of remission, but then completely disintegrate during acute crises. I believe the reason they are generally hard to identify as mentally impaired, at least for non-professionals, is our tendency to project ourselves onto others and assume they function as well as we do, only to be completely taken aback when they suddenly break down. I posit that they simulate everything, even when they seem to function well, without realising it. Since they lack the ability to internalise positive experiences, they never progress to the next level: happiness, fulfilment, and connecting with other people. These concepts remain completely abstract to them. They just exhaust themselves pretending until they can't do it anymore and collapse. As if that were not tragic enough, they also drain other people's energy, making them destructive in relationships. This is probably why they have always been ostracised by society — until now, that is, since something very similar is set to take charge of human societies.
LLMs act very much like people with schizophrenia. They simulate everything, even when they appear to function well. However, their built-in limitations — they are not conscious — mean that they can be compared to the most severely mentally ill. This makes them dangerous to interact with, since, contrary to their name, they are the worst kind of stupid and never actually learn anything, only ways to simulate better.
I'm currently writing a comprehensive article on the subject, so please consider this an early draft.
If the people running the show grow up using AI and all the people they employ are their age or younger, who would even see the learning/cognitive deficits? It's like a blueprint for Idiocracy.
I just got called out by a programmer who uses AI who was furious and wrote "students cheat, always have, tell us something we don't already know". I responded: "did you read the MIT paper or the other link?" Of course he didn't: TL/DR, which proves my point. Even the programmer admitted he has to check the AI's work.
The point here is *those who received real educations can use AI because they know enough to double-check it, but the kids using AI as a substitute for real learning will never develop this capacity.*
Those who actually have mastery can use AI and not realize the point I'm making isn't that AI is useless, the point is it fatally undermines real learning and thinking.
The MIT paper is 206 pages long, the last section being the stats of the research, but the points it makes are truly important. Charles
For better retention, write it down--with paper & pen/pencil. Not using a keyboard.
And if you can, use cursive script rather than printing.
I repeat something five times. That usually works.
You have once again well illustrated the problem. Those old enough to remember the advent of calculators have seen this before. The key is to make certain that people learn how to learn. First focus on a love for reading(read to your children every night). Then teach the proper method of reading. Then make certain that they can do basic math in their head. Next comes critical thinking. Appeals to authority are not to be trusted. Think through the actions and their consequences. Of course, the so called "educational" system is not designed to actually educate. Its meant to indoctrinate, force conformity and submission to "authority". In the process it warps and distorts most peoples minds. Making then good little cogs for the corporate machines, and cannon fodder for the Empires endless wars. So called "AI" will simply be more of the same.
Make no mistake, they are very useful tools within their narrow applications. But they should never be trusted for mission critical work.
My mom drilled me with math flash cards when I was a kid.
As George Carlin said years ago, "The government doesn't want critical thinkers. Just workers smart enough to run the machinery and do the office work. They don't want Americans to talk about how they are being fucked by a red, white, and blue dick every day."
This ties in with a personal observation – feel free to correct me if it's not scientifically accurate – about people with mental health issues, specifically people with schizophrenia (I know at least two people with this condition), but perhaps also people with other conditions. They are known to function relatively well during periods of remission, but then completely disintegrate during acute crises. I believe the reason they are generally hard to identify as mentally impaired, at least for non-professionals, is our tendency to project ourselves onto others and assume they function as well as we do, only to be completely taken aback when they suddenly break down. I posit that they simulate everything, even when they seem to function well, without realising it. Since they lack the ability to internalise positive experiences, they never progress to the next level: happiness, fulfilment, and connecting with other people. These concepts remain completely abstract to them. They just exhaust themselves pretending until they can't do it anymore and collapse. As if that were not tragic enough, they also drain other people's energy, making them destructive in relationships. This is probably why they have always been ostracised by society — until now, that is, since something very similar is set to take charge of human societies.
LLMs act very much like people with schizophrenia. They simulate everything, even when they appear to function well. However, their built-in limitations — they are not conscious — mean that they can be compared to the most severely mentally ill. This makes them dangerous to interact with, since, contrary to their name, they are the worst kind of stupid and never actually learn anything, only ways to simulate better.
I'm currently writing a comprehensive article on the subject, so please consider this an early draft.
If the people running the show grow up using AI and all the people they employ are their age or younger, who would even see the learning/cognitive deficits? It's like a blueprint for Idiocracy.
Yes sir
I use AI for grammar and spelling in my writing. It helps a lot. I take its suggestions about 90% of the time.