Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task
Technology
37
Beiträge
28
Kommentatoren
56
Aufrufe
-
Depends on the complexity of the route. When I visit my parents in another city (5-6 hour drive) I write down the intersections/exit numbers to look out for on a sticky note I leave on the dashboard.
I guess if you wanted to get detailed you could include the distance then as you drive do the mental math as an activity for yourself.
For long drives I have maps up mostly to alert me for traffic. Even if I know the route.
-
You would think the world right now is led by bright, clever, thoughtful individuals considering the AI panic lol
-
I've actually taken note of my navigational skills over the last couple years... I grew up in one state, and then a few years after graduating college, moved to a different state. When I was growing up, phone navigation didn't really exist as it does now, cars didn't have built-in navigation, and standalone navigation devices were slow and not all that great (at least the ones I could afford).
I find that when I return home, even 10 years later, I am able to navigate all the places I used to go unaided with ease, back-roads, niche routes, able to travel for hours without getting "lost".
When I moved, though, I had very recently gotten my first smartphone, and google maps was very convenient to "learn" the new area. I ended up just continuing to use navigation since it was convenient. I've found that beyond the major main routes, I don't have the same kind of "built-in" navigational skill that I do for my original home-turf. I never really learned the area.
I am moving towards a smart-phone-less life, and I've been able to let go of a lot, but GPS navigation remains a sticking point. I need to start training myself to navigate unaided in my current area.
I drive via landmarks and signs most of the time unless it’s an address I don’t personally know. Makes you feel more connected to where you live.
-
Maybe you number skills are fading because you waste your time and energy on pointless computations. Maybe they just fade with time...
The brain is a muscle that atrophies without use.
This is anti-scientific. But again I don't think doing multiplication problems is really going to help anything.
Your brain is weirdly unhappy with the concept of other brains doing math. Nice!
The brainpower involved in mental math is just real-time factorization and otherwise general application of the rules of arithmatic. It's no waste, it's just a well practiced set of pathways that take annoying math and make it friendly. It takes at most 2 seconds to know if it's time to use a calculator.
-
"ChatGPT, summarize this study for me"
-
Are you referring to the AI search results? If so, I've fallen into a similar strategy. I'll search for something, usuaply how to do something then read the AI result. If it's what I'm looking for, then I'll click through to the referenced articles. The AI result is usually too vague. Part of my problem is probably bad searching skills on my part. I'll often find what I'm looking for way down the first page or sometimes the second page of results. The AI cuts through that searching page after page or tells me that I need to change my search terms.
The real problem is that the first 10 links after the AI slop are all ads. At least the slop (for now) is less ad-centric. I am 100% sure that will change soon.
-
"EEG" on "AI"? I heard you like pseudo-science, so I put extra pseudo-science in your pseudo-science, dawg!!!
What's wrong with EEG?
-
Are you referring to the AI search results? If so, I've fallen into a similar strategy. I'll search for something, usuaply how to do something then read the AI result. If it's what I'm looking for, then I'll click through to the referenced articles. The AI result is usually too vague. Part of my problem is probably bad searching skills on my part. I'll often find what I'm looking for way down the first page or sometimes the second page of results. The AI cuts through that searching page after page or tells me that I need to change my search terms.
With Gemini I have had several instances of the referenced article saying nothing like what the llm summarized. Ie: The LLM tried to answer my question and threw up a website on the general topic with no bearing on the actual question
-
So basically LLM is new eugenics, we turn people back into animals.
-
Same reason I don't use GPS. I want to actually learn, use my brain and grow as a human.
No one grows when the work is done for them.
I use them to find a new route. I'll try and drive back on memory. After that I should be able to find it on my own
-
"ChatGPT, summarize this study for me"
You suck at learning.
-
"EEG" on "AI"? I heard you like pseudo-science, so I put extra pseudo-science in your pseudo-science, dawg!!!
- ☐ you misunderstand EEG
- ☐ you confuse EEG with something else
-
As an anecdote I can attest to this personally. I stopped using AI assistance tools for my work bc I noticed I'd stopped thinking about what I was doing
-
Same reason I don't use GPS. I want to actually learn, use my brain and grow as a human.
No one grows when the work is done for them.
Your brain doesn't have real time traffic information.
-
"ChatGPT, summarize this study for me"
Chatgpt is so hopelessly and blindly pro science it will be incapable to address its shortcomings unless you actively rub its nose in it. And that would mean you know how the sausage is made well enough that you don't need a summary.
-
You would think the world right now is led by bright, clever, thoughtful individuals considering the AI panic lol
We have the meanest dumfucks instead, we're tired of playing on easy mode.
-
- ☐ you misunderstand EEG
- ☐ you confuse EEG with something else
It's low energy brain porn, nmr brain imaging, gray matter v white matter, all the same flavour of reading tea leaves.
-
As an anecdote I can attest to this personally. I stopped using AI assistance tools for my work bc I noticed I'd stopped thinking about what I was doing
I can attest to the exact same thing.
-
It's low energy brain porn, nmr brain imaging, gray matter v white matter, all the same flavour of reading tea leaves.
- ☒ you misunderstand EEG
-
With Gemini I have had several instances of the referenced article saying nothing like what the llm summarized. Ie: The LLM tried to answer my question and threw up a website on the general topic with no bearing on the actual question
Same, especially when searching technical or niche topics. Since there aren't a ton of results specific to the topic, mostly semi-related results will appear in the first page or two of a regular (non-Gemini) Google search, just due to the higher popularity of those webpages compared to the relevant webpages. Even the relevant webpages will have lots of non-relevant or semi-relevant information surrounding the answer I'm looking for.
I don't know enough about it to be sure, but Gemini is probably just scraping a handful of websites on the first page, and since most of those are only semi-related, the resulting summary is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out. I also think there's probably something in the code that looks for information that is shared across multiple sources and prioritizing that over something that's only on one particular page (possibly the sole result with the information you need). Then, it phrases the summary as a direct answer to your query, misrepresenting the actual information on the pages they scraped. At least Gemini gives sources, I guess.
The thing that gets on my nerves the most is how often I see people quote the summary as proof of something without checking the sources. It was bad before the rollout of Gemini, but at least back then Google was mostly scraping text and presenting it with little modification, along with a direct link to the webpage. Now, it's an LLM generating text phrased as a direct answer to a question (that was also AI-generated from your search query) using AI-summarized data points scraped from multiple webpages. It's obfuscating the source material further, but I also can't help but feel like it exposes a little of the behind-the-scenes fuckery Google has been doing for years before Gemini. How it bastardizes your query by interpreting it into a question, and then prioritizes homogeneous results that agree on the "answer" to your "question". For years they've been doing this to a certain extent, they just didn't share how they interpreted your query.
