| |
| ▲ | jajko 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Its as if somebody finds shocking the fact that people are generally lazy. Then you have the other extreme group, deniers. "I work more than ever!", "I ask even more questions!" and so on here and elsewhere. Sure you do, and maybe its really an actual benefit for ya. Not for most though. For young folks still going through education, this is devastating. If I didn't have kids I wouldn't care, less quality competition at work, but I do (too young to be affected by it now, and by the time they will be allowed to use these, frameworks for use and restrictions will be in place already). But since maybe 30% of folks here are directly or indirectly dependent on LLMs to be pushed down every possible throat and then some more, I expect much more denial and resistance to critique of their little pets or investments. | | |
| ▲ | charlie-83 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | It feels like all this is because the point of school/college/university is just to get a piece of paper rather than to earn skills. Why wouldn't you get chatgpt to write your essay when your only goal is to get a passing grade. My optimistic take is that the rise of AI in education could cause more workplaces to move away from "must have xyz degree" and actually determine if the candidate has the skills needed. | | |
| ▲ | jbstack 5 days ago | parent [-] | | I agree with this in principle, but the problem is what happens to the in-between generation that cheats their way towards getting the piece of paper before the world moves on to a better way? At least for previous generations you got the piece of paper and you acquired some skills/knowledge. For this reason, I don't feel as optimistic as you do. I worry instead that equality gaps will widen significantly: there will be the majority which abuses AI and graduates with empty brains, and there will be the minority who somehow manage to avoid doing that (e.g. lucky enough to have parents with sufficient foresight to take preventative measures with their children). |
| |
| ▲ | sudosteph 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm one of the people who find LLMs extremely helpful from a learning perspective, but to be perfectly honest, I've met the children of complete "luddites" (no tablets, internet on home on timer for school work, not allowed phones until 16, home schooled, house filled with a million books) and they honestly were some of the more intelligent, well-read, and thoughtful young people I've met. LLMs may end up being both educationally valuable in certain contexts for certain users, and totally unsuitable for developing brains. I would err towards caution for young minds especially. |
| |
| ▲ | bgwalter 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not in China: https://nypost.com/2025/08/19/world-news/china-restricts-ai-... "That’s because the Chinese Communist Party knows their youth learn less when they use artificial intelligence. Surely, President Xi Jinping is reveling in this leg up over American students, who are using AI as a crutch and missing out on valuable learning experiences as a result. It’s just one of the ways China protects their youth, while we feed ours into the jaws of Big Tech in the name of progress." | | |
|
| Depends on who you are and what you want. Let's say I'm a writer of no skill who still wants attention. I could spend years learning to write better, but I still might not get any attention. Or I could use AI to write something today. It won't be all that interesting, because AI still can't write all that well, but it may be better than I can do on my own, and I can get attention today. If you care about your own growth (or even not dwindling) as a human, that's a trap. But not everyone cares about that... |
