kenforthewin

Why was the title of this submission changed after the fact?

For all the esotericism and downright weirdness of the rationalist community, you have to give it to them: they predicted all of this years or decades before anyone else was even thinking about it.

(Let's not dwell too long on the self-fulfilling overlap between LessWrongers and the AI research community).

HN discussions are filled with negative-sentiment AI comments that quickly get upvoted regardless of their connection to reality.

Is this not literally just Claude Code? I don't understand the hysteria.

It's a shame because I think there a lot of valid, thoughtful critiques one could level at the Rat/EA community; but this was not that.

> A study by MIT found that students who use AI to write show far less brain activity than those who used classic Google searching (with AI off) or those who used neither. Other studies find that students who use AI retain far less of the information that ends up in their writing, possibly as a result of “cognitive offloading” and “cognitive surrender.”

I'm unconvinced that AI will make us all dumber. In the public perception, at least among students, AI is viewed as a cheating tool. What kinds of students gravitate towards cheating tools to complete their coursework?

On the other hand, the opportunity for AI to act as a personal tutor, meeting you at your own skill and knowledge level, is limitless.

The site is performing poorly for me. For example, the login page took 9 seconds to load, same with the home page.

I have no idea what happens next if we create and horizontally scale superintelligence; one thing I do know for sure is it won't be "business as usual".