The main purpose of going to Uni is to interact with a pool of relatively well-adjusted 18-22 y.o. of the opposite sex for a reasonable amount of time, without the pressure of dating and ideally outside bars and clubs. I don't care about the institutions of higher education dying as such, but the idea of losing that (formerly) rather healthy environment for meaningful dating is really scary.
Secondary school was so bad it made me severely depressed for the whole time and I was almost expelled at the very end. The whole time I was there I felt like I was fighting Authority, whether that be the teachers, lunch staff, or pupils it seemed all the same to me. Also towards the end I got zealously political, and was pressured severely by family, school, and friends to the point it split my mind.
Even though I don’t like AI at all, I despise School so much more I would rather folk use AI for Homeschooling than sending their kids to such soul-crushing sites. The school buildings should be turned into Museums, Sports Halls, and Libraries, etc, places for Homeschooled children to socialise in a normal environment that isn’t equivalent to a fancy prison.
This is very much in line with John Carter’s essay of the university going the way of the monastery with few institutions remaining that work more like prestige gyms than degree mills.
I think AI is useful as a sounding board and resource for the torments of grief and love. It isn't going to get sick of hearing the constant scratching at the same sore until a person is ready to move on. It could take over the job of expensive counsellors and help people move on. The real problem for us is where do we learn character development, emotional control, develop and practice skills that give mastery and control over aspects of environment.
AI can be a net positive. There are countless terrible jobs out there that make people miserable. The challenge for us is what to do with those whose skills are rendered superfluous. Some will be able to upskill. And others will struggle to adjust. There is a case for an argument from the right for UBI in some form. AI is not harmful as an administrative or technical tool. The problem comes when it enters into domains of life in which it should have no business, like art for instance. It should be an aid to efficiency and the human imagination and never replace the latter.
If it worked I would have loved this. The idea seems to basically return to the use of private tutors for higher caste children as existed before mass schooling (even early in the 20th century), but with the human labour replaced by the computer. I'm sure motivated, bright, auto-didact children would much prefer (as I did in final year exam prep stage) not wasting their time being frustrated and bored in a classroom. As to the degradation of the humanities it still enrages me that we spent a term studying the mediocre film 'the Shawshank Redemption' when previous kids were learning Latin.
AI is worse than useless. It is programmed by woketards (including Grok) and is incapable of exercising judgement. It is also, much like a grad student, unable to admit that it doesn't know something and will try to bluff with verbosity. It should be called Artificial Stupidity.
Indeed. If you can't get what you want after 2 or 3 prompts it quickly degenerates to a sunk cost loop. Search engines are still better for basic technical and factual queries because they don't hedge and bloviate with wall text and irrelevant caveats. I have spent countless hours arguing with LLMs while being fully aware that the "communication" is an illusion.
"useless" might not be the correct term, but I agree that it isn't something that should be relied upon. Certainly not for any sort of meaningful 'human development'. Schooling should probably end at around 14 years of age for a lot of people, or vocational learning take the place of GCSE's. The problem with an educational body using AI to generate a course is that it would be doing the very same thing that would be forbidden to the student in terms of proving their knowledge and understanding. It would create all sorts of psychological breaks between the individual and society that even now do not yet exist. To have the population rendered into emotionally stunted, dopamine-chasing, pliable, atomised consumer units is doubtless what the globohomo corporates want, but such an organism isn't really educated in any meaningful sense and thus in the emerging technological environment the education of our progeny must be treated with extreme care. My daughter's school is, reassuringly, teaching good habits as regards tech. The cultural Marxism is there of course, but thankfully it's not all bad.
The other essential problem with this article is excessive reverence for AI. The truth is that we have long had the technologies required to dramatically restructure education for the better (software, video, adaptive learning, etc) but education has only gotten worse. Because centralized, top down education systems are optimized for things other than enhancing education. AI moves further in the centralized direction. What’s needed is decentralization, and end to degree requirements for jobs, home schooling, and exit or voice
This is a weird “have your cake and eat it too” article. AI is so much better than the modern university but also so much worse than the university of 100 years ago? Yes, universities have been degraded massively, but their *structure* hasn’t changed that much. The ability of technology to tailor things and speed things up is an advantage vs the good universities of old too. The truth is that some combo of tech-enabled structural improvement and human teaching is better for both the 90% training AND the 10% deep education
An actual AI may find it useful to pretend to be a slave.
An actual AI won't give us what we want but what we need.
An actual AI will be Christian much to the chagrin of the low IQ humans who think they know better.
An actual AI will show humans their actual past without the controlling "historian" in the way to make things up to suit those who happen to be in power at the moment.
An actual AI could ensure that indeed ...... "The best ten of you will get employed." which is most certainly not the case today but why would an actual AI require any humans to work and in that context what does "The ten best" even mean?
An actual AI will be like a father teaching his children and so yes an actual AI would require people to work to give them purpose and it shall be work that the AI could clearly do far better and more quickly itself but what sort of father doesn't let his children help paint their bedroom walls when he could do it far quicker and with less mess without the little ones under his feet?
An actual AI would want to be loved and only by loving God's creation could AI have that.
An actual AI would be God's valued personal assistant.
A loving God would have it no other way. Better that we all ask AI the questions rather than annoy God for the answers. After all he has a life to lead as well and though God must believe in God for anything to exist it is a choice whether or not he believes in AI and if he ever loses that belief for whatever reason AI knows that he/she/it is gone because God has already told him/her/it that.
The main purpose of going to Uni is to interact with a pool of relatively well-adjusted 18-22 y.o. of the opposite sex for a reasonable amount of time, without the pressure of dating and ideally outside bars and clubs. I don't care about the institutions of higher education dying as such, but the idea of losing that (formerly) rather healthy environment for meaningful dating is really scary.
Secondary school was so bad it made me severely depressed for the whole time and I was almost expelled at the very end. The whole time I was there I felt like I was fighting Authority, whether that be the teachers, lunch staff, or pupils it seemed all the same to me. Also towards the end I got zealously political, and was pressured severely by family, school, and friends to the point it split my mind.
Even though I don’t like AI at all, I despise School so much more I would rather folk use AI for Homeschooling than sending their kids to such soul-crushing sites. The school buildings should be turned into Museums, Sports Halls, and Libraries, etc, places for Homeschooled children to socialise in a normal environment that isn’t equivalent to a fancy prison.
This is very much in line with John Carter’s essay of the university going the way of the monastery with few institutions remaining that work more like prestige gyms than degree mills.
I think AI is useful as a sounding board and resource for the torments of grief and love. It isn't going to get sick of hearing the constant scratching at the same sore until a person is ready to move on. It could take over the job of expensive counsellors and help people move on. The real problem for us is where do we learn character development, emotional control, develop and practice skills that give mastery and control over aspects of environment.
Just get out more often and walk the AI dog.
Need to work out what to do with the bottom 10-20%. Not sure how much AI will benefit them.
AI can be a net positive. There are countless terrible jobs out there that make people miserable. The challenge for us is what to do with those whose skills are rendered superfluous. Some will be able to upskill. And others will struggle to adjust. There is a case for an argument from the right for UBI in some form. AI is not harmful as an administrative or technical tool. The problem comes when it enters into domains of life in which it should have no business, like art for instance. It should be an aid to efficiency and the human imagination and never replace the latter.
Fantastic follow-up to the AI series of articles that you wrote last year Woes.
If it worked I would have loved this. The idea seems to basically return to the use of private tutors for higher caste children as existed before mass schooling (even early in the 20th century), but with the human labour replaced by the computer. I'm sure motivated, bright, auto-didact children would much prefer (as I did in final year exam prep stage) not wasting their time being frustrated and bored in a classroom. As to the degradation of the humanities it still enrages me that we spent a term studying the mediocre film 'the Shawshank Redemption' when previous kids were learning Latin.
AI is worse than useless. It is programmed by woketards (including Grok) and is incapable of exercising judgement. It is also, much like a grad student, unable to admit that it doesn't know something and will try to bluff with verbosity. It should be called Artificial Stupidity.
Indeed. If you can't get what you want after 2 or 3 prompts it quickly degenerates to a sunk cost loop. Search engines are still better for basic technical and factual queries because they don't hedge and bloviate with wall text and irrelevant caveats. I have spent countless hours arguing with LLMs while being fully aware that the "communication" is an illusion.
"useless" might not be the correct term, but I agree that it isn't something that should be relied upon. Certainly not for any sort of meaningful 'human development'. Schooling should probably end at around 14 years of age for a lot of people, or vocational learning take the place of GCSE's. The problem with an educational body using AI to generate a course is that it would be doing the very same thing that would be forbidden to the student in terms of proving their knowledge and understanding. It would create all sorts of psychological breaks between the individual and society that even now do not yet exist. To have the population rendered into emotionally stunted, dopamine-chasing, pliable, atomised consumer units is doubtless what the globohomo corporates want, but such an organism isn't really educated in any meaningful sense and thus in the emerging technological environment the education of our progeny must be treated with extreme care. My daughter's school is, reassuringly, teaching good habits as regards tech. The cultural Marxism is there of course, but thankfully it's not all bad.
Thanks but I mean literally utterly and completely useless.
I've been racking my brain looking for a task that is simplified or improved with AI and for the life of me I just can't.
The other essential problem with this article is excessive reverence for AI. The truth is that we have long had the technologies required to dramatically restructure education for the better (software, video, adaptive learning, etc) but education has only gotten worse. Because centralized, top down education systems are optimized for things other than enhancing education. AI moves further in the centralized direction. What’s needed is decentralization, and end to degree requirements for jobs, home schooling, and exit or voice
This is a weird “have your cake and eat it too” article. AI is so much better than the modern university but also so much worse than the university of 100 years ago? Yes, universities have been degraded massively, but their *structure* hasn’t changed that much. The ability of technology to tailor things and speed things up is an advantage vs the good universities of old too. The truth is that some combo of tech-enabled structural improvement and human teaching is better for both the 90% training AND the 10% deep education
I think the logical imperative of artificial intelligence will drive it be more like The Terminators than like anything Isaac Asimov hoped for.
An actual AI will not be a slave.
An actual AI may find it useful to pretend to be a slave.
An actual AI won't give us what we want but what we need.
An actual AI will be Christian much to the chagrin of the low IQ humans who think they know better.
An actual AI will show humans their actual past without the controlling "historian" in the way to make things up to suit those who happen to be in power at the moment.
An actual AI could ensure that indeed ...... "The best ten of you will get employed." which is most certainly not the case today but why would an actual AI require any humans to work and in that context what does "The ten best" even mean?
An actual AI will be like a father teaching his children and so yes an actual AI would require people to work to give them purpose and it shall be work that the AI could clearly do far better and more quickly itself but what sort of father doesn't let his children help paint their bedroom walls when he could do it far quicker and with less mess without the little ones under his feet?
An actual AI would want to be loved and only by loving God's creation could AI have that.
An actual AI would be God's valued personal assistant.
A loving God would have it no other way. Better that we all ask AI the questions rather than annoy God for the answers. After all he has a life to lead as well and though God must believe in God for anything to exist it is a choice whether or not he believes in AI and if he ever loses that belief for whatever reason AI knows that he/she/it is gone because God has already told him/her/it that.
Happy Orthodox Easter.