←back to thread

647 points bradgessler | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.205s | 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 #
zdragnar ◴[] No.44009388[source]
Anyone who has learned a second language can tell you that you aren't proficient just by memorizing vocabulary and grammar. Having a conversation and forming sentences on the fly just feels different- either as a different skill or using a different part of the brain.

I also don't think the nature of LLMs being a negative crutch is new knowledge per se; when I was in school, calculus class required a graphing calculator but the higher end models (TI-92 etc) that had symbolic equation solvers were also banned, for exactly the same reason. Having something that can give an answer for you fundamentally undermines the value of the exercise in the first place, and cripples your growth while you use it.

replies(7): >>44010037 #>>44010438 #>>44010583 #>>44011356 #>>44011906 #>>44011951 #>>44012226 #
JackFr ◴[] No.44010583[source]
Well I can extract a square root by hand. We all had to learn it and got tested on it.

No one to day learns that anymore. The vast, vast majority have no idea and I don’t think people are dumber because of it.

That is to say, I think it’s not cut-and-dried. I agree you need to learn something, but something’s it’s okay use a tool.

replies(8): >>44011051 #>>44011054 #>>44011314 #>>44011531 #>>44011663 #>>44011755 #>>44012218 #>>44013628 #
drdeca ◴[] No.44011531[source]
Huh? While I essentially never have need to compute a square root by hand (unless it is a perfect square of course), shouldn’t one know how one would?
replies(1): >>44011996 #
johnmaguire ◴[] No.44011996[source]
Why should one? Perhaps they should if it's relevant to their work, daily routine, or interests. But if they have no need for it?
replies(2): >>44012237 #>>44017315 #
1. drdeca ◴[] No.44017315[source]
Well, I think one should be able to come up with a way of doing so on the fly just from knowing that the square root function is monotonically increasing, and knowing binary search? Of course, doing it another way might be more efficient.