> It's easy to use AI to greatly increase your knowledge of a subject.

It's actually not.

It's easy to get an AI to say a lot about a subject, but that doesn't mean anything the AI said was true. There's a significant risk that the AI has simply hallucinated the information, and now you "know" a bunch of false ideas about the subject, which is worse than not knowing anything about it.

▲

veber-alex 2 days ago | parent [-]

Right because without AI everything you read on the internet is 100% true and correct.

Learn how to use AI properly just like any tool and you can benefit.

▲

contagiousflow 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Can you explain the differences between using AI "properly" and "improperly" for learning?

	▲	veber-alex 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Double check what the AI tells you. Apply common sense instead of blindly trusting everything. If it's something technical in nature try to verify and test it. I treat AI as any other information I see online with the added value that it's customized exactly to my needs and it works pretty well for me.

▲

kerkeslager 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Right because without AI everything you read on the internet is 100% true and correct.

The hallucination percentage of referenced sources such as Wikipedia is much better than AI, and for many sources such as the NYT or Al Jazeera, it's easier to tell what human bias would cause someone to maybe be inaccurate--we're leveraging our existing knowledge because we deal with other humans all the time.

AI, on the other hand hallucinates in unpredictable ways.

> Learn how to use AI properly just like any tool and you can benefit.

Sure. But the claim I was disagreeing with was that it's easy to use AI ("properly" being implied). I'm saying it's NOT EASY to use AI properly. In fact, it's so difficult that even intelligent people can't do it, and many more won't do it.