Remix.run Logo
sph 2 hours ago

Price of human intelligence is going up actually, because there's ever-decreasing amount of it, and we've invented a cheap substitute that makes people even stupider.

silverFork 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

In schools there are massive changes. I was told that kids are more relaxed and care less about education and that the value of the smart kids, the know it all kids, is going down as more students can access Ai and they are not as helpless as they were when failing to tune in while in the class. The dynamics are changing and students are less suicidal too apparently because the pressure to deliver scholastically is going down because no one knows what the future holds and what will be valued.

inanutshellus 3 minutes ago | parent [-]

I'd expect this to be temporary while the educational system figures out how to manage LLM-bolstered students.

The intern I worked with last year said her graduating class all felt like they were the last "real" graduates. Meaning: the class after her had less credibility in her eyes, having been presumed to have used AI to get past the "pons asinorum"/"bridge of asses".

bryanrasmussen an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Can you prove to me that the price of human intelligence is going up? At best it is as it always has been, intelligence in some fields is going up.

It's generally true that the rarer something is the more valuable that is, but only if there are enough potential buyers of the thing that can recognize it. If there is an ever-decreasing amount of intelligence there is probably an ever-increasing amount of stupidity - so will the stupid be smart enough to reward the intelligent with high paid positions?

What I suppose is actually that human intelligence will become more monetizable, by allowing those with it to better take advantage of their unrecognizable ability. But only if the interlocking systems of humanity do not fall apart and destroy the world due to there not being enough intelligent people left to make things work, as per various works of science fiction on the subject.

ryeats an hour ago | parent [-]

Group think is highly unlikely to provide new discoveries.

bilbo0s an hour ago | parent [-]

Well, I mean, neither is non-group think.

That's the issue. No one can really systematize "discovery".

How many "group thinkers", "creatives", "non-group thinkers", "nihilists", "anarchists", "contemplatives" in the last - say, 500 years, 5000 years, whatever - have been occasioned by the fall of an Apple? Or the fall of a branch? Or a leaf? Or what have you?

Why did it spark a new flame in the mind of Newton? Science can't explain. If we could, we'd teach everyone to be that sort of contemplative.