A cautionary warning about AI I'm starting to use is, "make sure you aren't taking a forklift to the gym". Getting heavy objects of the ground is vastly easier with mechanical assistance, but doing so completely misses the point of lifting weights.

A work related example I have is using AI to generate project plans. LLMs can probably generate an ok project plan for straightforward projects with plenty of examples to be trained on. But perhaps the most important value of generating a plan is the thinking that goes into it. Considering alternatives, likely failures, unlikely failures, etc. In generating the plan you are starting to practice dealing with problem that would come up while implementing it. The knowledge in your head is more valuable than the document produced. The document is just a summary of all the thinking you have done. Essentially a collection of mnemonics. Many details in your head will never make it into the formal plan, but will be needed during implementation.

▲

nunez 4 days ago | parent [-]

A more accurate metaphor comparing the gym to LLMs IMO is using cable machines in place of old-school barbell and dumbbell work.

You can --- and people have --- built strength-focused programming around cable machines. "They're safer and work target muscle groups more efficiently" is usually the argument. A Life Fitness Synergy system is also much more practical to own inside of one's house than a power rack and 1000+ lb of plates that will make quick work of most home flooring.

This strategy works. It's sure as shit better than doing nothing. But quadriceps, delts and lats don't work in isolation. They rely on secondary and tertiary muscles and entire kinetic chains to help them accomplish tasks.

Cables do hit muscle groups directly, but they also lead to diminishing strength and physique returns much more quickly than boring traditional weight training. They also lead to problematic muscle imbalances that, ironically, can cause overuse injuries later in life (super heavy leg extensions with improper knee flexion comes to mind).

▲

tpdly 4 days ago | parent [-]

Just because LLMs are a technological innovation for "going to the gym" does not make cable machines a good metaphor. Maybe cable machines with cables made of highly variable grade hemp are comparable to LLMs-- they'll break randomly, and cause unexpected friction here and there. A cable machine still involves a human doing a thing. A forklift at the gym does the work instead.

All this fluff about targeting specific muscles etc is simply not analogous to LLMS. Maybe old-school barbells are paper files and fax machines, and cable machines are Slack, Asana, and Excel?

	▲	nunez 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I'll clarify. The cable machines are efficient because they _do the work_ of performing a movement for you, much like how LLMs do the work of writing an e-mail from a prompt describing what you want to write. They are designed to only activate the target muscle/muscle group during the movement, which is good for working that muscle but bad for working all of the other muscles that _should be_ activated in the kinetic chain for that movement. That's the metaphor I was trying to convey.