←back to thread

323 points timbilt | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.536s | source
Show context
wcfrobert ◴[] No.42131165[source]
Lots of interesting debates in this thread. I think it is worth placing writing/coding tasks into two buckets. Are you producing? Or are you learning?

For example, I have zero qualms about relying on AI at work to write progress reports and code up some scripts. I know I can do it myself but why would I? I spent many years in college learning to read and write and code. AI makes me at least 2x more efficient at my job. It seems irrational not to use it. Like a farmer who tills his land by hand rather than relying on a tractor because it builds character or something. But there is something to be said about atrophy. If you don't use it, you lose it. I wonder if my coding skill will deteriorate in the years to come...

On the other hand, if you are a student trying to learn something new, relying on AI requires walking a fine line. You don't want to over-rely on AI because a certain degree of "productive struggle" is essential for learning something deeply. At the same time, if you under-rely on AI, you drastically decrease the rate at which you can learn new things.

In the old days, people were fit because of physical labor. Now people are fit because they go to the gym. I wonder if there will be an analog for intellectual work. Will people be going to "mental" gyms in the future?

replies(9): >>42131209 #>>42131502 #>>42131788 #>>42132365 #>>42133145 #>>42133517 #>>42133877 #>>42134499 #>>42136622 #
booleandilemma ◴[] No.42131209[source]
I used to have dozens of phone numbers memorized. Once I got a cell phone I forgot everyone's number. I don't even know the phone number of my own mother.

I don't want to lose my ability to think. I don't want to become intellectually dependent on AI in the slightest.

I've been programming for over a decade without AI and I don't suddenly need it now.

replies(6): >>42131278 #>>42131399 #>>42131519 #>>42131551 #>>42131674 #>>42134045 #
brookst ◴[] No.42131551[source]
Interesting perspective. I read your first line about phone numbers as a fantastic thing -- people used to have to memorize multiple 10 digit phone numbers, now you can think about your contacts' names and relationships.

But... I think you were actually bemoaning the shift from numbers to names as a loss?

replies(3): >>42131654 #>>42131978 #>>42132242 #
1. girvo ◴[] No.42132242[source]
Have you not run into trouble when your phone is dead but you have to contact someone? I have, it's frustrating. Thankfully I remember my partners number, though its the only one these days.
replies(1): >>42146518 #
2. 542354234235 ◴[] No.42146518[source]
I had to maintain a little physical phone book because, while I can memorize 10 people’s numbers, I cant memorize 25, 50, 100. Not having that with me when I needed it, or if you lost it and had no backup, was far less convenient than today. It feels like this is a case of magnifying a minor, rare modern inconvenience and ignoring all the huge inconveniences of the past in favor of a super narrow case where it was debatably “better”.