←back to thread

645 points bradgessler | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
don_neufeld ◴[] No.44009004[source]
Completely agree.

From all of my observations, the impact of LLMs on human thought quality appears largely corrosive.

I’m very glad my kid’s school has hardcore banned them. In some class they only allow students to turn in work that was done in class, under the direct observation of the teacher. There has also been a significant increase in “on paper” work vs work done on computer.

Lest you wonder “what does this guy know anyways?”, I’ll share that I grew up in a household where both parents were professors of education.

Understanding the effectiveness of different methods of learning (my dad literally taught Science Methods) were a frequent topic. Active learning (creating things using what you’re learning about) is so much more effective than passive, reception oriented methods. I think LLMs largely are supporting the latter.

replies(6): >>44009388 #>>44010296 #>>44010436 #>>44010768 #>>44011460 #>>44011653 #
johnisgood ◴[] No.44010436[source]
You can learn a lot from LLMs though, same with, say, Wikipedia. You need curiosity. You need the desire to learn. If you do not have it, then of course you will get nowhere, LLMs or no LLMs.
replies(5): >>44010465 #>>44010488 #>>44011049 #>>44011406 #>>44011771 #
hooverd ◴[] No.44011771[source]
Wikipedia isn't going to write your paper for you. I don't see the difference between an LLM and one of those paper writing services in this context.
replies(1): >>44012964 #
1. johnisgood ◴[] No.44012964{3}[source]
We are talking about learning. You can learn much more from LLMs than Wikipedia, because if you do not understand something, you can always ask an LLM about it, and it would reply to you in any way you want; whatever helps you learn better.