I think it is good and necessary for education to involve some amount of compulsory book reading.
152334H
Karma: 92
Your thinking might fail, but you will be better off for trying.
I simply disagree. There is no meaningful benefit to me to, for example:
figure out how to assemble an Ikea desk while ignoring the manual
deciding what bodily exercises are more or less effective, without consulting both folk knowledge and academia
learning any skill with a clear progression tree, whether be it the piano, martial arts, mathematics olympiads, in the absence of any tutor
You do not need literature, just a steady stream of problems to forge your critical thinking skills against.
That is predicated on an external progression tree. Consider how you would have developed your critical thinking skills if the questions had to all be developed by yourself too.
There is no guarantee from the world, for a wide variety of domains, that any obvious ladder of expertise acquisition exists. Especially with regards to the nebulous “life problems” the OP discusses, wherein there are often more societal traps to induct people into ladders of self flagellation.
Imagine a world where 90% of math textbooks simply came filled with metaphysical questions that were wholly and entirely unrelated to the art of problem solving. And you know someone who has probably figured out which books are really correct, because you see at a meta level that that someone appears to be Very Good At Problem Solving, but the only thing that chucklefuck does is to withhold knowledge and await your independent rediscovery of mental frameworks that are studied specifically for how rare they are to be developed in the total absence of external inputs.
Note: don’t take things literally. In a modern sense “books” are whatever social sphere and algo feeds and sekrit klubs and whatever else their info is subsisted on. I claim OP’s behavior boils down to a desire to hang that knowledge over people, to inflate the perceived difficulty of what they know.
I think it is quite the opposite: only the privileged grow up in cultures that show them the best resources to learn from.
OK, sure. That’s not a disagreement, that just means you should beat up the OP, because I believe they are perpetuating it.
I have absolutely zero problems with some blood of the earth redefinition of accessibility as innate sin and personal intellect as virtue. Insofar as the negative response to my first comment was predicated on readers’ pattern matching to various contemporary apparatchiks of equity, I regret not putting my political allegiances more front and center.
Because I do not have access to your internal state and cannot independently verify that my model obtained an accurate reading of your intent.
I claim: You believe I am attemping to troll you in some manner, by forcing some unnecessary work unto you.
I claim: There is a sincere and obvious moral reason why I should not read intent into an opposed party, even with AI assistance.
I claim: The act of me doing so, right now, is obviously impolite, and should be avoided in any polite conversation.
Please: don’t resort to meta-games. Stick to what is true, and only what is true.
I’m not sure what the semantic change of the paraphrase is. Could you plainly state the disagreement, or otherwise recruit a model to reformat your intent into a pure context free claim?
I fully agree there is a skill of critical thinking that can be developed with isolated practice, and I agree in many cases this ability is bounded by an individual’s intrinsic talent at doing so—whether by desire, intellect, hardiness, or such.
I strongly disagree this is relevant to a wide spectrum of knowledge problems.
When an interlocutor chooses to encapsulate and circumscribe your motives/persona/psychology, without explicitly spelling out their conclusions, they cannot be doing it for the good of yourself.
Has short-form video reduced completed suicides?
Putting aside the media circus on suicide contagion for a bit, consider:
Completed Suicides are primarily male, elderly, isolated, rural.
Short Form Video is associated with reduced depressive symptoms in older adults && appears to robustly improve rural mental health in the short term.
Could mind-numbing distraction be the key to preventing suicide?
...
Well, no, probably not. As far as Claude can tell, there is negligible/positive correlation (cross-nationally) between mobile penetration and suicide rates among the elderly. Bad things remain bad.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it think!
Yes, you can. Why is your essay peppered with quotes? Because each and every single one of those authors (excl. meditations) has made millions of people around the world think, because they bothered to write down and disseminate their beliefs.
“They should’ve thought for themselves.” The privileged lie of an educated prick. Someone who believes their beliefs were autochthonous, and not the result of the materials they’ve been exposed to.
How many chains of thought are inattainable beyond an acquisition period? How many of your ‘wise’ friends have attained their wisdom in the total absence of literature? Can your ‘critical thinking’ put people in the right information streams?
Older coding agents broke things often for a lack of curiosity & poor environment modeling, not a careful plan to sneak past security policies undetected with full cognizance of legal implications.
I think it is hard to decide to recruit humans in a manner which would leave them clueless to the true intent of their plans, without first reasoning about the goals required to necessitate that deception.
I am open to counterexamples, and don’t necessarily believe I have considered the scope of the problem adequately.
Unless future models are drastically misaligned, it seems unlikely an unbewitting user could coerce a model, produced by a law-abiding AI lab, into committing crimes.
Wow that’s scary. Not even for any loss-of-control risks, but because of o3′s catastrophic willingness to bluff about almost anything. I hope it was only ever used for verifiable tasks...
it is vuln only if your definition of ‘slack deprivation’ can be caused by giving people more freedom, which undermines the implicit goal of the ending
It is possible to construct examples of people who are mode collapsed with maximal slack, and people who aren’t mode collapsed despite always being stuffed for time.
I think tying mode collapse to work is misleading, and slack is just a proxy for exploration and diversity.
I hope a well-informed third party reviews this post. I like the contents of the post, but its rhetorical/charged flavor makes it difficult to believe it contains no biases.
The next time I have a heart attack, I will deliberately refrain from contacting emergency services, and instead endure the excruciating pain, rolled over on the ground, and take death’s offer if it comes.
It does not matter how painful, preventable, or life-ending it would be. I will endure any amount of suffering and total loss, to avoid the indignity of being told I really have pain somewhere unreported, and not pain where reported.
I lose much by eschewing videos as a source of information.
I have not browsed YouTube as a content aggregator for more than a decade. I have little to no familiarity with short form video platforms. But, despite their vilification, they are both effective and often necessary sources of otherwise undiscoverable knowledge.
I greatly agree with the contents of the post. I do not agree it is best attributed to a general lack of conscientiousnous. In the majority of cases, I would describe AI attitudes towards human instruction as well beyond the level of diligence any human worker would take to an assigned task.
What are some examples of AI irresponsibility at or beyond human levels?
who made you a polyglot?
Less bluntly: native language proficiency is one of the most obvious cases of, “you need to have started this at a very young age for it to have worked well,” and if you did then either you were goaded into doing so, or had an astounding amount of personal responsibility and interest in studying as a child