Rather than getting ever deeper insight into a subject matter by actively working on it, you iterate fast but shallow over a corpus of AI generated content.
Example: I wanted to understand the situation in the Middle East better so I wrote an 10 page essay on the genesis if Hammas and Hizbulah using OpenAI as a cowriter.
I remember nothing, worse of the things I remember I don’t know if it was hallucinations I fixed or actual facts.
LLMs can be great sparring partners for this, if you don't use it as a tool that writes for you, but as a tool that finds mistakes, points out gaps and errors (which you may or may not ignore) and helps in researching general questions aboit the world around you (always woth caution and sources).
Just like a person could, which is why one validates. AI is not one's sole information. That's dangerous, to say the least. It also helps to stay within one's formal education, and/or experience, and stay within logical boundaries one can track themselves. It is really all about understanding what you are doing, committing to run without you.
But that means considering LLMs as a thinking tool rather than a tool that does work for you is worth it.
To the extent we can call it skill, it's probably going to be made redundant in a few years as the models get better. It gives me a kind of listlessness that assembly line workers would feel.
I wonder what the commercialized form of a "gym but for your brain" would look like and if it would take off and if it would be more structured than... uh... schools? Wait, wouldn't this just be like a college except the students are there because they want to be, and not for vocational reasons?