We’re at the point of learning that some things that used to matter no longer do, and some things we used to think mattered never did. It’s a going to be a shock to everyone, and this same phenomenon is happening everywhere, not just academia or software engineering.

My bet: a lot of the things we used to do were habit, ceremony and gatekeeping much more than being necessities.

▲

thom 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You’re probably right, but I’d also bet some things that we’re about to sweep aside will turn out to have been necessities and we’ll find it very difficult to bring them back.

▲

Chance-Device 6 hours ago | parent [-]

To be pedantic about it, if something is a necessity it can’t be done without by definition. So if you’re in that position whatever you’re talking about wasn’t a necessity. Is this like Socrates thinking that reading will make people lazy and forgetful?

▲

passwordoops 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

More like how using hand-held computers programmed for dopamine hits could further entrench a sedentary lifestyle, reduce social cohesion, and lead to individual brain rot

▲

applfanboysbgon 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> If something is a necessity it can’t be done without by definition

You fail at being pedantic. If you wanted to be pedantic about this, it would first be necessary to define what it is a necessity for. Are the things being swept aside a necessity for the universe to continue existing? No, definitely not. But perhaps they could be a necessity for the (academic) culture to prosper. Which do you think is more likely that the person you responded to meant, that they were talking about things being necessary for the universe to keep existing or things being necessary for our culture to flourish?

There is nothing worse than a half-assed pedant who can't even be sufficiently pedantic to make a point correctly. Really, that's closer to autism, not pedantry. There are inferred clauses when people speak, but you (choose to?) intentionally disregard them and interpret them in the wrong way, thereby arguing against things that weren't said. Even programs can infer unstated clauses by context (eg. can successfully infer from `var x = 2` that x is an int despite it not being said, without explicitly declaring `int x = 2`).

▲

Chance-Device 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Wow, that’s needlessly aggressive, but you do you.

I wonder what it is about this subject that makes people so angry? I think I’ll settle on status. People are afraid of having their social status taken away by AI and become irate at the thought of it.

	▲	applfanboysbgon 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		My response to you has no bearing whatsoever on the subject of this thread. I work at a successful AI startup and am set to retire for life comfortably no matter what happens. It's your specific class of action that irritates me. These orange websites are plagued by people intentionally misrepresenting other people's words and telling them they're wrong based on things they didn't actually say. It's the most annoying, detrimental-to-conversation kind of comment you can possibly make. And it does pedantry a bad name! There's nothing wrong with being pedantic, and drilling into the details to get everything right. But drilling into the details and getting them wrong is offensive and the only purpose it serves is to annoy everyone around you. Going back to my programming example, suppose your compiler decided to interpret 'var x = 2' as a string and then told you you were wrong, throwing an error instead of compiling your program, even though it's the compiler being defective and not adhering to the established language rules for type inference. That's you, in this conversation. That does not add to the conversation. The compiler needs to be fixed so it stops doing that.

▲

tgv 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is that your way of saying: I don't care? Because it sounds are if you're relativizing the problems to the level where you don't have to.

You don't specify what you think "no longer matters." And so there's no way to judge what you think is the impact.

> My bet: a lot of the things we used to do were habit, ceremony and gatekeeping much more than being necessities.

Yeah, right. "I've got a calculator, so we no longer need to learn arithmetic." It's the way of the ostrich.

▲

Chance-Device 6 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s a general sentiment about the way I think things are heading. You seem angry about it, that’s for you to figure out for yourself.

	▲	tgv 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nero probably even enjoyed seeing Rome burn. I think other people might have been angry. Don't be Nero.

▲

21asdffdsa12 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

So the value is in those who where actually kept outside by the gatekeepers. Those that can use the new tools and are no longer kept at bay by those that need artificial moats. The very same innovation that creeps to the front of society in a war, is going to be liberated. I toast to that.

What is possible as ground-truth, if the "tarbabies" of society get sidelined can be seen in Ukraine.

▲

noosphr 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I find that I'm much more tolerant of bad spelling and terrible punctuation because I know that a human being wrote it in the end. It's kind of hilarious that a sign of poor quality is now a sign of passion if not quality now.

	▲	cognitiveinline 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There's an LLM prompt that will trivially do that.

▲

ilumanty 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Really depends on how the resource wars pan out. If inference continues to get monopolized and the monopolists do a rug pull in terms of availability of AI tools, the old ways will still matter.

▲

qsera 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>It’s a going to be a shock to everyone..

Not to everyone though...

▲

goatlover 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

When these things no longer matter, who will that benefit and who will be disadvantaged? What will the costs or net benefits to society be? Disruption can be good or bad, or often a mix. It's hard to say now whether social media was a net benefit, but it has definitely been disruptive.