back
15 comments
It worries me how many people prefer using AI over doing their own thinking. How much of your life will you "live" on autopilot? Hollowing out your own soul little-by-little when you do things like that.
> How much of your life will you "live" on autopilot?

If you start doing it in school, presumably the rest of your life, since you'll have no skills or ability to learn.

This is 100 times scarier, and more likely, than the "chatgpt will become skynet and nuke the world" and "Ai will replace every jobs in 5 years" pipe dreams
The even scarier thing is, there are people I know who are well educated etc and in my conversations with them I hear more and more about how they are relying on chatgpt for information re. surgery and illness and so on. As if chatgpt came up with the information itself, as opposed to, being a more superior interface that uses the same data as Google Search - at least with Google Search you actively knew you the source of the information.

I believe this speaks to something deeper about humans - only those with great discipline will be able to prevent themselves from being sucked in and losing their valuable human capital. It doesnt seem to matter whether one is dumb or smart.

This is why you ask for sited sources and then check those sources.
Do you know what sources gemini gives me now? AI generated YouTube videos with literally 5 views.

llm poisoning is already well underway

the fella is a tad lost and cant see the big picture.
Theres a reason why sources are not cited by default in chatgpt responses. Youre missing the entire point buddy.
There is a reason I dont use chatgpt, "buddy". Figure out how to get useful results out of the slop or don't, your choice.
It's funny how people can't help themselves, despite realizing that just around the corner is "if all you are is an interface to chatgpt, what are we paying you for exactly?".
Here's what I tell people at work: It's OK to use AI, but you must say it's AI. If you post something and say "Here's what GPT-5 says" - great. Love the efficiency. If someone asks you to do something and you respond with clearly AI-generated crap masquerading as your own, you will be getting a piece of my mind.
> "Here's what GPT-5 says"

This drives me nuts. It's often wrong, but then I have to do the research to prove it before the conversation can get back on track.

Had a coworker paste an error log from a repo I maintain in Slack with an LLM summary of the log, three dot points which were written quite clearly in the log if he’d bothered to read it.
I use AI mostly for writing docs and always make sure the documents have an "AI generated content" notice as the first thing readers see.

In the codebase itself I add in-line comments pointing to precisely where AI was used.

AI has proven very useful for providing extensive in-line comments too as my employer is pushing hard for our Ops guys to learn IaC despite the vast majority having zero-to-none development experience.

Contextual comments explaining _what, why & how_ loops/conditionals/etc. work has (so far anyway) proven quite successful.

personaly, I am very busy spooling up a new iteration of my business, and various constraints are forcing me to quicker descision making, and a patern is emerging where I need to cut other humans off, when it becomes clear that they are working from and to false information, and will not let go of "that" to focus on the actual situation and task at hand, the flip side is that some people are cutting ME! off, when I insist on sticking to the actual real world reason for our talking, rather than a digresion into the "app" and it's issues. the take away is that the "attention economy" has worked past anything functional and is well into unintended consequences territory.