Hacker News Reader

Comment by AstroBen | Hacker News Reader

Relevant quote from their conclusion:

> Among participants who use AI, we find a stark divide in skill formation outcomes between high-scoring interaction patterns (65%-86% quiz score) vs low-scoring interaction patterns (24%-39% quiz score). The high scorers only asked AI conceptual questions instead of code generation or asked for explanations to accompany generated code; these usage patterns demonstrate a high level of cognitive engagement.

This is very much my experience. AI is incredibly useful as a personal tutor

View on HN

Yes. I love using AI for the “where do I even start” type questions. The once I’ve had a discussion about various approaches I know what docs to actually look at and I can start thinking about implementation details. I don’t find AI very useful for generating code (weird position I know).

Why weird? I share this position.

The LLMs have been trained on countless introductory tutorials for most popular topics, so they will provide you with a reasonable one.

Ad and friction free for now.

Enjoy it while it lasts.

This is also how I use LLMs at work. I have some vague worries because I'm told this is outdated, I'm falling behind, etc. I'm doing it this way in part hecause my employer is a big, old, slow company and experienting with other kinds of "AI" tools is virtually impossible. But I think it's really more my style.

A personal tutor who you remain skeptical of, and constantly try to disprove in order to perfect your understanding.

A tutor that can guide you through jargon and give you references. If "skepticism" is even something you have to think about, you are already outside of the optimum path.

“Jargon” is shorthand for people who know what they’re doing. If you’re avoiding jargon, you’re avoiding learning.

"guide you through jargon" is what the comment said

GP is saying that the LLM of choice is not necessarily able to translate the jargon, or establishes itself to be an expert at the concept(s) to employ the jargon compatible with the user.

I don't know what to say. You seem to be implying that the jargon if fundamentally unlearnable, and not amount of subsidiary text or help can help anybody.

I see it more of a replacement for Google and digging GitHub issues. It can also replace chats for 80% of questions.

Not much as a tutor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com