Why? Cognitive load could go elsewhere. Like going from low-level programming to better architecture decisions.

Why would it go to better architecture decisions when you can just ask the AI to make those too?

The Human problem with "the everything machine" is that it does "everything" and by and large Humans really do need to do something while we're alive

> Why would it go to better architecture decisions when you can just ask the AI to make those too?

Because anyone could do that.

To remain competitive, humans will have to keep using their cognitive functions.

Remaining competitive is already such an exhausting, burnout fueled treadmill

I cannot imagine how miserable it will be trying to keep up with the AI slop firehose

Remain competitive by not producing a firehose of slop. Remain competitive by producing "non slop", even if it's not a firehose.

Because the AI is not good for the big picture or really understanding anything at all.

If the human doesn't do it, no one does.

So great if the AI can help with the subtasks, bad if people assume the big problems will solve itself.

> Why would it go to better architecture decisions when you can just ask the AI to make those too?

Because AI can’t do it. It does not understand anything and probably won’t before a very long time.

> Cognitive load could go elsewhere.

EVE ponytail length

Because people are lazy.

Yes it's obvious but you're supposed to go one step deeper and consider the implications of this.

Why? This website is for 2-liners, not in-depth discussions. More and more I find myself discussing important ideas with Gemini, not other people :/

You can't tell what's sincere and what's parody anymore. It's like we had a mini internet death before the big one.

Serious question: Are your offline conversations also being replaced this way?

Yes and no? I think irl conversations were always more about connecting "what's going on in your life, who did what, I'm worried about X" eg with family. On the rare occasion there's a disagreement over facts, it's absolutely great to have a LLM ref to adjudicate. So the LLM is supplementary. It even does emotional persuasion better than I do. But yes I do find overall I have slightly less subjective need for irl conversations because I have been talking with the LLM.

Interesting. Thanks for responding. As I've gotten older (or maybe it is the times and not me), I've found online conversation less stimulating, and like you, most of my IRL conversations are focused on more social/personal things. I've used LLMs for learning, but not conversation; but I've been scratching that itch with books, which, although they are not the same as conversation, do offer something similar.