> One major problem I see with the use of AI is that it will prevent people from building an understanding of <insert problem domain X here>. This will reduce people's ability to drive AI correctly, creating a circular problem.

Very much the opposite. LLMs do a fantastic job of increasing accessibility of knowledge.

They have wide exposure to content and is incredibly good at spotting patterns and suggesting both well established norms from the current domain and serendipitous cross domain concepts.

I feel the concern you share is LLMs expose new frontiers to people who otherwise might not even have imagined that frontier exists and then those people do a lazy or superficial job of it because they lack any internal motivation to do a deep dive on it

▲

bovermyer a day ago | parent [-]

We must be from _wildly_ different backgrounds.

▲

subhobroto a day ago | parent [-]

It's possible we are from very similar backgrounds but bring wildly different perspectives. I'm always suspicious of statements of the form "X will prevent people from Y".

The amount of progress humans have made over 2000 years, especially the last 100, is just phenomenal. If anything, there's very little evidence that any X prevents people from Y. X certainly might not require people to Y anymore but I don't question what a motivated person can do just like I don't question what an unmotivated person can refuse to do.

It would help if you expanded on "it will prevent people from building an understanding of <insert problem domain X here>", but could one interpretation of it be "AI will prevent people from building an understanding of good software design patterns" because AI allows people to just vibe code and pay no attention to design patterns at all?

▲

bovermyer 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Let me start by asking you this:

Where does the majority of an individual's general knowledge come from?

	▲	subhobroto 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		their environment and life experiences