←back to thread

Playing in the Creek

(www.hgreer.com)
346 points c1ccccc1 | 3 comments | 11 Apr 25 05:05 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
profsummergig ◴[11 Apr 25 06:21 UTC] No.43651005[source]▶
Requesting someone to please explain the "coquina" metaphor.
replies(5): >>43651071 #>>43651073 #>>43651084 #>>43651280 #>>43651415 #
hecanjog ◴[11 Apr 25 06:34 UTC] No.43651071[source]▶
I think that they're saying a little bit of playing around with replacing thinking and composing with automated tools is recoverable, but at an industrial or societal scale the damage is significant. Like the difference between shoveling away some sand with your hands to bury the small creatures temporarily and actually destroying their habitat by "lobbying city council members to put in a groin or seawall, and seriously move that beach sand."
replies(1): >>43651091 #
1. profsummergig ◴[11 Apr 25 06:38 UTC] No.43651091[source]▶
I skimmed the Anthropic report and didn't catch the negative effects. Did they mention any? Good on them if they did.
replies(1): >>43651180 #
2. hecanjog ◴[11 Apr 25 06:54 UTC] No.43651180[source]▶
Yes, they mention a few times the concern that students are offloading critical thinking rather than using the tool for learning.
replies(1): >>43651410 #
3. Cthulhu_ ◴[11 Apr 25 07:46 UTC] No.43651410[source]▶
I just hope the educational institutions catch on, stick with their principles and don't give them the paperwork. The paper / title should be evidence of students' learning and thinking abilities, not of just their output.