The analogy makes a lot of sense to me. Once you have an “easy button”, it’s hard to not use it. It’s sort of like when you’re at work and see the “quick workaround” effectively become the standard process.
I remember burning out on games because the cheats made them really fun in the short term, but afterward playing normally felt like agony.
Here’s something I’ve been thinking about. I’ve been playing through some need for speed games on emulators for the past few years. Once I bound keys to save and load states it was over: I’d save-state before every turn and run them over and over until I got them perfect. Doing this I did eventually learn the maps really well though, and on more recent playthroughs I’ve barely used save-states, which was obviously far more satisfying. I realize this isn’t the same thing as ai or walkthroughs, but I think maybe these tools do share something in that they lower the barrier to entry to different sorts of skilled tasks we may not yet feel competent to accomplish. Like training wheels or a helping hand, we can let go of them once we feel steadier on our own.
I like this analogy and it’s a good way to think about this sort of AI help, but I guess the problem arises when people don’t have the same awareness. If you don’t realise it’s more fun/satisfying, you might never take the training wheels off. I know it seems obvious to me or you but a lot wouldn’t see that correlation.
I’ve been playing co-op games recently and half my group want to revert the save anytime anything goes south. I always refuse (I host) and we’ve had some really fun times digging ourselves out of the hole. Even the save scummers agree they were the most fun playthroughs, but then they still want to save scum next time.
Totally agree. It can be hard to let go of something you’ve grown accustomed to.
here’s this thing that has nothing to do with the topic we’re discussing. I acknowledge it’s not even remotely the same. But think, what if it was?
Someone’s got a case of the grumpy-poos ☹️
just pointing out the hypocrisy in your argument.
I don’t really see where the hypocrisy is? If you think what the commenter you’re replying to said wasn’t relevant that’s fine, but where’s the hypocrisy?
statement that sets the context of the comment
statement that disarms anyone calling “bullshit” by acknowledging the context above is useless fluff.
the hypocrisy of continuing to support an argument previously stated as “not the same thing as”.
this is is pointless commentary from a person who is clearly not objective but is pretending to appear objective by disarming the shortcomings in their argument by acknowledging them outwardly. this is a common tactic employed by people who have a weak position and lack confidence in their argument.
the reason why the argument lacks confidence is because there is no viable evidence that AI improves cognitive ability in humans while there is verifiable evidence that it harms cognitive abilities.
for example:
there are so many more instances of cognitive decline available, just search for them.
Alright, I was just asking where the commenter was hypocritical
It’s just a conversation bud, I don’t disagree with op’s point, just adding another perspective. You can grow dependent on your tools just like you can use them to better yourself.