Technology

You mean for centuries right?

Oh yeah? C'mere a minnit and say that to me face

Today they are willfully ignorant in spite of having the facts available.

What "facts", because all kinds of stuff, once vetted by media is now equally represented as "facts" and "Science", all over social media.

The biggest problem we have right now is confidence bias, because you can find "facts" to support any predjudice, then call it "common sense".

the issue with becoming more knowledgable about the world is you feel less special.

and people are desperate to feel special. our entire consumer economy is built around exploiting folks insecurities and convincing them that their purchases make them better than other people.

Using AI as a rubber duck is what he did. I've used you guys in that manner. Quit a couple of asklemmy posts I had started because crafting the question and explaining the issue led me to a resolution.

And it was posted in this community recently.

This is a great conversation because I'm one of those people who's terrible at arithmetic, but quite good at math. As in: I can look at a function, visualize it in 3D space, see what different max, mins and surfaces are dominated by what terms etc, but don't ask me to tally a meal check. I'd be useless at applying any math without a calculator.

Similarly, there's a lot of engineers out there that use CAD extensively that would probably not be engineers if they had to do drafting by hand.

The oatmeal did a comic that distilled this for me where they talked about why they didn't like AI "art". They made the point that in making a drawing, there are a million little choices made reconciling what's in your head with what you can do on the page. Either from the medium, what you're good at drawing, whatever, it's those choices that give the work "soul". Same thing for writing. Those choices are where learning, development, and style happen, and what generative AI takes away.

That helped crystalize for me the difference between a tool and autocomplete on steroids.

Edit: to add: you're statement "I claim to understand but don't" hits it on the head and is similar to why you have to be careful if plagiarism in citing academic review papers. If you write YOUR paper in a way that agrees with the review but discuss the paper the review was referencing, and, even accidentally, skip over that the conclusion you're putting forward is from the review, not the paper you're both citing, that's plagiarism. Notion being you misrepresented their thoughts as your own. That is basically ALL generative AI.

I saw a YouTube video from a professor that explains how our brains need at least 15 minutes of nothing so it can be creative. Everyone now has a smart phone that takes that away from us. AI is just next level taking that away from us. It’s destroying all our minds.

Yep, that's certainly what started it, AI just made it way worse

i suspect slahdot people are quite happy in their bubble there without the facebook and other users...

from the not-very-good-at-analogies dept

Slashdot is like a canned fart in a bottle forgotten in the attic. Open up the bottle, take a sniff.... welcome back!

Yeah, I was recently introduced to Bonhoeffer, his insight is incredible and the fact that similar mistakes are taking place today.

Peter Turchin is as close to Hari Seldon I think we’ll have, his models point to a lot of turmoil in the future.

the individual matters more than the education. i know several st johns graduates whose personality is yes-men. i have a liberal arts education from an ivy and 95% of my peers at uni thought it was stupid and just wanted job skills. they didn't give a fuck about learning or education, they just went there so they could get a job at goldman or similar and get rich or because their parents told them had to. they thought i was mentally ill for valuing liberal arts and focusing on education rather than getting a big fat paycheck after graduating.

a Socratic education only works if you already inclined towards skeptical inquiry. you can't educate people into skepticism, it's really an emotional disposition. normal people do not want to think anyone than they want to run marathons. only a small percentage of people are inclined to such activities.

i taught philosophy for 3 years, about 500 students. maybe a dozen of them actually learned anything... the other 490 were just there for a requirement/grade/elective and did absolutely did not give a fuck other than thinking quoting Plato make them sound smart and win arguments, or help them further entrench themselves in their delusional conspiracy mindset. had about 50% of my students actively argued for exploiting slaves for business profits, because all that mattered was their own wealth.

for every liberal atheist skeptic linux genius here on lemmy, there about a 100+ people who believe the opposite out there in the real world.

We should, it's a factor: