"The result is not perfect" as LLMs are

"The fact that it reflects on my own thinking during the game makes it interesting from a teaching point of view, so I thought it was worth sharing." As AI the premium sycophantic scammer does

"but for me it is a much more pleasant and memorable experience than clicking around Stockfish branches"

And SO much less effective than doing the harder, more tedious feeling work

▲

brumar 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The jury is out for the effectiveness, it's hard to debate this subject. From my cognitive background I know very well how important the generative effect is for learning. Maybe I'll add features that leverage generative/testing effect one day. Anyway, clicking on stockfish branches can be quite a passive activity too if done badly. I don't know how to do that well to be honest. My goal is often to just to understand what I missed, full stop.

For the sycophancy, I can say I did not feel that at all. When stockfish says your move suck, claude would have a hard time saying the opposite (no "you are absolutely right" when I am not).

▲

Madmallard 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Generative AI is really good at making you feel like you understand a lot without actually making you understand anything in-depth

Because lengthy difficult cognitively intensive labor is required for the brain to actually change its structure and connections

	▲	brumar 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Very true. I like to think AI somehow optimizes for "efficient vagueness", which is bad news for our brain. Nonetheless, as many do, I often ask AI to explain me stuff. I know it's not perfect, but it's convenient, it's a trade-off to make.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]