• gibmiser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      While i agree, don’t pretend this isn’t orders of magnitude different in how it can effect how people go about solving problems.

      Behavioral psychology is going to have fun unraveling just how it changes people’s action and thinking.

    • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      Kinda - it was about people being unable to do maths if they rely too much on calculators. And it’s actually a valid argument, if you care about mental maths*.

      There are two differences here, though:

      1. Calculators are rather good at simple calculations. Large language models suck at outputting anything resembling critical thinking. They’re always bullshitting, and unless you have good critical thinking you’ll swallow bullshit after bullshit, because your tool requires a skill that you don’t have due to your unrestricted usage of that tool.
      2. Critical thinking is a considerably bigger deal than being able to do simple maths by head or by hand.

      *you should - it’s often faster and less laborious to do coarse maths by head than by calculator, and it allows you to spot errors you wouldn’t otherwise. Same deal with any other tool, tools are great but you should be able to do the basics without them too.

    • bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      A tool for what? Automated writing?

      This is like trying to tell people you won’t through driver’s ed, because you rode a bus a bunch of times.

      The point of the coursework is to have the children show that they can relate information in a specific way. Showing the information isn’t the point, the exercise of constructing the answers themselves in the point.