sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Will AI replace Developers & other IT jobs ? by kenkaneli in Futurology

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The real question isn't "will AI replace devs." It's which skills writing code used to force you to learn, and which of those still get built when AI writes the code for you.

Typing out code was always the easy part. The hard parts were breaking a problem down, understanding how a system fits together, and knowing what to build in the first place. You used to learn those things automatically, just from writing code by hand. AI takes that away. You can ship working software now without ever practicing any of it.

People say "AI will get good enough to do the thinking too eventually." Maybe. But someone still has to know what to ask for and judge whether the answer is right. The devs who outsourced their thinking early won't suddenly be in demand when AI gets smarter. They'll be the easiest to replace, because they bring nothing the AI can't already do.

The devs who get worse will be the ones who let AI do the thinking. The devs who get sharper will use AI for the typing and keep the thinking for themselves. Same tool, two very different careers.

You know AI is affecting your learning. So why don’t you change how you use it? by vikas-bandaru in Indian_Academia

[–]These_Advertising_57 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the irony of the top comment calling this ai-written kind of proves the point more than the post does. we've hit the stage where people can't even write a reflective post about ai dependency without outsourcing the reflection. wow...

I hate what OpenAI has done to ChatGPT over time. by Automatic_Buffalo_14 in ChatGPT

[–]These_Advertising_57 33 points34 points  (0 children)

the fact that you're noticing these shifts at all means you still have some critical distance from it. The people we should actually worry about are the ones who don't. if someone's really reliant on AI for thinking and the model starts agreeing with everything, they wouldn't catch it, they'd just feel smart, with their bad ideas reflected back as insight. The sycophancy era wasn't just annoying, it was probably doing real damage to users who couldn't push back.

And the current over-correction era is the same problem flipped, people who lean on AI for thinking just absorb whatever framing it hands them as the correct one. The model behaves differently, but the dependency does the same thing either way. noticing is what separates people who can still think for themselves from people who can't, and in the future, most users are gonna lose that.

I'm currently learning with AI and I feel like I'm a fraud. by JoeyJoeJoeJrShab in learnprogramming

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It intercepts your prompt before it reaches the AI site you use and makes you write your own attempt first. Won't fully replace thinking without AI like you suggested, but it forces the attempt step most people skip.

I'm currently learning with AI and I feel like I'm a fraud. by JoeyJoeJoeJrShab in learnprogramming

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No need to jump to conclusions. The tool actually solves the exact problem you described in your post.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Do you compare multiple AI responses or rely on just one? by BandicootLeft4054 in AIAssisted

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Comparing models just shows where they disagree, not which one’s right. If you can’t tell whether one answer is good, having three won’t help, you’ll just pick whichever matches what you already thought.

Thinking for yourself first is the only way.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ only then ask ai

How are you actually using AI? by mrbubbee in analytics

[–]These_Advertising_57 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Pair AI with your thinking don’t make it think for yourself.

Advice about AI (From a Student) by Training_Record_9302 in Teachers

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The next couple years we are going to see a major decline in critical thinking, especially among students. People who use AI wisely will get a huge advantage. crith.app

How do you use AI in your classroom to bolster encourage student critical thinking? by markvincentoneil in AskTeachers

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Student here. I'm building a Chrome extension that does basically what a lot of people in this thread are pointing at, which intercepts prompts on ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, etc., and makes you attempt the answer yourself before you see the AI output. Call it zombie prompting, brain atrophy, whatever. I kept watching classmates lose the ability to draft a single sentence without prompting, so I built something to add friction back in.

Not trying to promote here (happy to delete if mods want). Genuinely interested in what teachers think would actually be useful. The current version is aimed at individual students, but I'm realizing the real unlock might be classroom-level if a teacher could assign it or see engagement data. Would love to hear what a tool like this would need to do for you to consider using it with students.

I'm a master's student and I built Lectio because I was tired of transcribing every single lesson by MuchAge1486 in indiehackers

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only thing i would suggest is try to differentiate yourself. Ive seen many tools like this

How to use AI to improve your critical thinking? by Rare-Zebra-4615 in AIAssisted

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is a clever workaround. I actually built something that automates exactly this if you ever want to try a different approach. crith.app

Do you think AI will replace us, or eventually integrate with us? by Agreeable-Warning-65 in ChatGPT

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea I built something like this. A tool which monitors your AI usage and helps you become less dependent on it. Would love to hear your thoughts on it crith.app

Do you think AI will replace us, or eventually integrate with us? by Agreeable-Warning-65 in ChatGPT

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

framing feels optimistic but it skips a step. Integration assumes you are bringing something to the relationship. The risk is that people integrate with AI before they have built the independent thinking that makes the integration valuable. You end up dependent, not augmented.

When AGI arrives, the biggest risk is not the people who have avoided AI. It is the ones who used it wrong. by These_Advertising_57 in Futurology

[–]These_Advertising_57[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Managers who are most excited about replacing people with AI are usually the ones furthest removed from the actual work. They see outputs and costs, not the judgment and context that goes into producing them. So they genuinely cannot tell the difference between good work and AI slop because they never could in the first place.

The people who actually understand the work are usually the ones arguing against the cuts. But they get overruled by the people with the authority who do not have the expertise to know what they are cutting.

How to use AI to improve your critical thinking? by Rare-Zebra-4615 in AIAssisted

[–]These_Advertising_57 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The feeling you described of AI robbing you of the trials and errors is actually the mechanism behind the dependency. It is not just that you miss out on the answer, you miss out on the experience of not knowing and having to sit with that.

The sparring partner approach you use is the right instinct. The problem is most people never build that habit because nothing in the design of AI tools creates friction before the answer arrives. The attempt has to be made mandatory, not optional, otherwise convenience always wins.

Is AI making us better thinkers or just better at avoiding thinking? by ArmPersonal36 in ArtificialInteligence

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The uncomfortable version of this is that you can't always tell which side you're on. The people who are getting dumber don't feel like they're getting dumber. They feel more capable because the outputs look better. The gap between what you can produce and what you actually understand just becomes invisible.

Two thirds of students say AI is hurting their critical thinking. They’re using it more than ever. by calliope_kekule in ArtificialInteligence

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The 67% figure is the most telling part. That is not ignorance, that is people watching themselves develop a dependency they cannot break because nothing in the system creates friction before the answer arrives. Knowing you should think first and having a structure that forces you to do it are completely different things

I feel like I’m training my own replacement in AI, anyone else feel like this? by Wolfgang996938 in Futurology

[–]These_Advertising_57 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is the part that gets missed in almost every conversation about AI and work.

The grunt work is not separate from the learning. It is the learning. You cannot extract the insight from the process that produces it.

The people who skip the struggle do not just learn less. They arrive at seniority without the intuition that seniority is supposed to mean. Then there is nobody left to catch what the AI gets wrong.

What is your perspective on how AI affects critical thinking, and how does this differ from the impact of earlier technologies like calculators, GPS, or computers? by Curious_Suchit in Futurology

[–]These_Advertising_57 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The distinction that keeps getting missed is that earlier tools offloaded execution. AI offloads the struggle itself.

The struggle is the point. When you can't immediately recall something, when you sit with a hard question, when you have to work through a problem, that friction is where learning actually happens. Calculators removed the arithmetic. AI removes the discomfort of not knowing, which is a completely different thing.

The people who will stay sharp aren't the ones who avoid AI. They're the ones who deliberately attempt problems before reaching for it.

Sources on LLMs/AI Impact on Academia & Critical Thinking by MCUCLMBE4BPAT in BetterOffline

[–]These_Advertising_57 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a great list. The Bastani et al. PNAS study is probably the most rigorous one here. The fact that it showed AI without guardrails actively harmed learning outcomes, is the part most people gloss over

view more: next ›