"The worst part is that AI is covering up their deficiencies. They don’t know what skills they lack. They don’t even know what skills are required because they haven’t put the effort in."

This is the biggest issue with AI. It is incredible when in the right hands (Senior devs who know good fundamentals and know how to code) but really bad when in wrong hands (Juniors with no fundamentals but they are made to believe that they know what they are doing).

▲

Salgat 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's a catch-22 because juniors need AI to be competitive, but you need to do the grunt work yourself for a few years before you really build the skills necessary to advance. I can't imagine learning how to do math by simply reading a solution book.

▲

21asdffdsa12 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

So how do you design a harness that tries to grow the user? As in quiz the prompter in a way that forces them to reflect and improve?

And if they can do that- could they do it to themselves- going from a junior to a pro conversation?

▲

voakbasda 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

You cannot speed run human learning. Investing time to read and absorb the material, repeatedly exercising and expanding your understanding, is the only path.

Not coincidentally, this is exactly how we train our AI.

Edit: but to answer your question, an AI harness can only emulate the best teaching methods. Learning is up to the human.

▲

ChoGGi 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You don't understand math with a calculator; you use paper to understand math.

The same way you wouldn't let a junior electrician near a drill, he gets screwdrivers till he learns to be gentle.

AI should only be for people with existing knowledge of a trade.

	▲	heelix 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		My grandfather used to say 'any power tool can be a sander, if you use it wrong'.

▲

vrighter 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

you revoke their claude/chatgpt/copilot license

▲

yifanl 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You can't, as that removes the main value add of the AI.

▲

hawaiianbrah 3 days ago | parent [-]

I really disagree with that stance. It would be trivial to have it ask you questions about what it produced to ensure you understand. I’ve literally already done that several times.

▲

dns_snek 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

"Understanding" someone else's solution is not comparable to solving it on your own, even if you can answer some questions about it. It builds extremely fragile surface-level understanding.

That struggle and repeated failure before finally connecting the dots on your own is how you build intuition and deep understanding.

	▲	preg_match 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, all learning takes practice, it's the core of how our brain learns things. Any tool that eliminates the practice part means suboptimal, or zero, learning. Practice isn't just for physical tasks like riding a bike. All skills take practice, meaning repeated cycles of failures over a long time horizon.

▲

yifanl 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We're way too far down this current UIUX disaster to pretend "sane defaults" is a nice-to-have.

▲

bluefirebrand 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

From what I can tell, the value add for AI seems to be this behavior you're describing

But the value add being marketed is something entirely different, which is where the disconnect is coming in