marcofloriano

We are the last human AI free generation that lives on. It's your basic human instincts kicking in.

Because they are not. Autocomplete completes the only thing you already thought. You solve the problem, the machine writes. Mechanical.

LLMs defines paths, ideas, choose routes, analyze and so on. They don't just autocomplete. They create the entire poem.

The point of the OP is not the fun. It's the craft. He's losing his craft!

It's not about typing, it's about writing. You don't type, you write. That's the paradigm. You can write with a pen or you can type a keyboard. Different ways, same goal. You write.

LLMs code for you. They write for you.

Thank you

Same with me !

Every AI video demonstration is always about funny stuff and fancy situations. We never see videos on art, history, literature, poetry, religion (imagine building a video about the moment Jesus was born) ... ducks in a race !? Come on ...

So much visual power, yet so little soul power. We are dying.

No. When the government fails to delivery what people need (not necessarily wants), you have a bad government. When gangs and bandits (or drugs, or diseases, or whatever) takes on the street, it's not about people's view, it's just bad stuff that the government need to address or there's no point on having a government.

It's actually so safe to say that such a small study like that can point out clearly the fact. But of course, as it is a very sensitive topic, 'the language' and 'the narrative' should be carefully chosen, or you can be 'banned'. Off course we wont see new studies like that anytime soon.

> What the study actually showed, people don't have an investment or strong memory to output they didn't produce.

Problem with LLMs is, when you pass hours feeding prompts to solve a problem, you actually did help (a lot!) to produce the output.

> Is it safe to say that LLMs are, in essence, making us "dumber"?

> No! Please do not use the words like “stupid”, “dumb”, “brain rot”, "harm", "damage", "passivity", "trimming" and so on. It does a huge disservice to this work, as we did not use this vocabulary in the paper, especially if you are a journalist reporting on it

Maybe it's not safe so far, but it has been my experience using chatGPT for eight months to code. My brain is getting slower and slower, and that study makes a hell of a sense to me.

And i don't think that we will see new studies on this subject, because those in lead of society as a whole don't want negative press towards AI.

Same here, i just finished my subscription at ChatGPT, i feel free again.

It's different to read and understand a prompt and actually produce the code. It's a different level of cognition.

It's not the same with LLMs. What the study finds out is actually much more serious. When you use a phone or a calculator, you don't lose cognitive faculties. But when you delegate the thinking process to an LLM, your Brain gets phisically changed, witch leads to a cognitive damage. It's a completely different league.

Indeed, thanks for pointing out. I tried to edit my comment, but it's not possible anymore.

I completely agree with your comment. The common narrative about Galileo and the Church is often oversimplified and overlooks the intellectual context of the time. As you pointed out, it wasn’t about a crude Biblical literalism—after all, even centuries before Galileo, figures like Saint Thomas Aquinas, drawing on Aristotle, already accepted that the Earth is spherical.

By Galileo’s era, the Catholic Church was well aware of this scientific truth and actively engaged with astronomy and natural philosophy. The dispute was far more about competing models and the standards of evidence required, not a refusal to accept reason or observation.

Then I can’t help but think: if the author of the article didn’t even understand this, how can the rest of the article be correct if it started from a biased and almost false premise?

"And I think that's how it should be. I didn't feel comfortable hacking up the code of a Real Programmer."

Ok, i actually cried at this part.

"It's so simple that nothing goes wrong."

This. The hardest part of solving a problem is to think about the problem and then come up with the right solution. We actually do the opposite: we write code and then think about it.

Best observation so far. Specially the cost side of using all those APIs ... i pay in dollars, but earn in reais (brazil), the cost scares me.

Ideas are not cells. They live in a different reality. Cells don't have quality. They can't have. But ideas can be good or bad. Bad ideas can kill you. There should be black cells and white cells in the game rules in order to this post make some sense.

"Proving to yourself that the code works is your job. This is one of the many reasons I don’t think LLMs are going to put software professionals out of work."

Good point

"If you’re using an LLM to write code without even running it yourself, what are you doing?"

Hallucinating

Preston Thorpe, about your epiphany moment, any possible relationship with Jesus ?

Congratulations on creating such an amazing app! I´m myself a (brazilian) wordpress blogger, but i needed a place on the cloud to do my personal writings without distractions.

Starting to write right now.

Thank you!

A bank!

I'm very suprised they didn't have scurity cams at the IT office. When he breaked in, i thought that was the end of story.

What frustrates me is the tendency to use technology to replace humans beings. Then you don't know how to solve the shortcut in jobs. Couldn't we just slow down tech a little bit and let people do some good old hard work to keep getting their cut? Frustrating.

Relates a lot with my entrepreneur experience. My last venture sunk like 5 years of my life and money. Guess most risked things are hard. The hardest part is to actually get experience. Experience is different from success.

In my case marriage was the great motivator for leaving frendiship and not having new friends. My old friends who are single now, still have good friendship, even after 30. I guess my best friend is my wife now.

I'm not an engineer, but i can relate a lot with that:

19. The odds are greatly against you being immensely smarter than everyone else in the field. If your analysis says your terminal velocity is twice the speed of light, you may have invented warp drive, but the chances are a lot better that you've screwed up