Switch to mobile version

Humans Are About to Learn Like Never Before

Post image for Humans Are About to Learn Like Never Before

Humans aren’t good at predicting the future, but sometimes you can see a trend that promises something great — like “a genie is granting your wish” great. I think this might be happening right now with one of my genie wishes, maybe yours too.

For me it has to do with the piles of unread books I own. There’s almost nothing I want to do more than plow through stacks of 600-page history and philosophy books, but my efforts are mostly thwarted by the cognitive difficulty I have with processing line upon line of printed text. While I’m reading, my attention veers off at least once or twice per sentence (unless I read aloud, which is slower, hard on the throat, and not always appropriate).

It’s not a small impediment to learning. Not to sound dramatic, but those books represent something I want badly that feels locked away from me, like I’m stuck in the middle act of some frog prince fable. Imagine you loved swimming more than anything, but water happens to cause you horrendous itching.

Audiobooks allow me to spend more time reading (e.g. in the car, at the gym) but lapses of attention still occur frequently. I rewind a lot, but I still miss the context needed to understand the next point. Missed context accumulates until the content is mostly lost on me, then interest crashes completely and I stop.

This happens because books, in any form, are essentially long strings of interdependent sentences, which must be read and understood in order. They operate something like old strings of Christmas lights – miss an important “bulb” and the rest might not work for you at all.

When you skipped a footnote

There are other ways to learn, of course, but they too depend on one’s ability to comprehend long, uninterrupted strings of declarative statements (e.g. recorded lectures), or else they’re expensive and time-consuming (formal education, tutoring), or both.

Books are the traditional go-to for self-directed learning, and I would pay a million dollars for a way to reliably and comfortably get their contents into my head. I envy people for whom reading a book is a straightforward matter. There’s so much I want to learn and study, but processing 500 pages of interdependent sentences is about as easy for me as tying off five thousand balloons while wearing loose rubber dishgloves. Despite this handicap, I’ve certainly read hundreds of books to completion, but I’ve abandoned thousands. Too many missing bulbs.

Me reading Heidegger, page 4

Regardless of whether you suffer this particular bottleneck to self-directed learning, we’re starting to get some new tools that could multiply your current ability to learn.

Over the last few months, I’ve been using A.I. tools, such as Claude or ChatGPT, to learn in a different way. Mostly I get primers on things I’ve always wanted (or suddenly want) to know, such as how does jury duty work, what was Hegel actually talking about, or what do tariffs do and why do people disagree so strongly about them? I can then dig as deeply as I like into the topic, down any strand of inquiry.

The conventional method of intellectual inquiry, for most topics, is to find and read a long sequence of declarative sentences published by someone who apparently knows what you want to know. This means books if you want depth, encyclopedia entries if you want summaries, essays if you want opinions, and lectures if you want lectures.

All of these learning forms, however, depend on your ability to follow, sentence-by-sentence, the thin and winding line upon which the author wants to unspool their knowledge, creating a potential Christmas-lightbulb problem. Every lapse of attention during a given “unspooling” creates another gap in the context for everything to follow, creating a state of ever-disintegrating interest and comprehension. Many of us simply aren’t going to make it through the endeavor — some facts get through, but a working knowledge never crosses over to the new host.

Curiosity level by page 78

This isn’t a huge problem for everyone, but I suspect it is for a massive, untold segment of the population. How many students completely disengage with learning material, at some point, in virtually every subject, because they can’t hold onto an interesting thread long enough? How many people check out of the practice of reading at all, early on in life, because it’s more frustrating than rewarding?

Talking to an A.I. like Claude or ChatGPT allows you to inquire into a topic from right where you are, circumventing the Christmas-bulb effect. You can begin with exactly the aspects of the subject you’re most curious or confused about. What even is jury duty? How do they teach jurors to interpret evidence? Or is that even a part of it? Was that thing I saw on Law & Order the way they really do it?

An A.I. can engage your right at your current level of understanding (or misunderstanding). If you need a definition, or more context, in order to proceed, just ask. If the explanation is too general, you can tell it to get specific. If you need a metaphor, it can provide one (or three or four) immediately. If its language is too technical, or too basic, you can adjust that.

Knows how it works

You can tell an A.I. to answer your question in fifty words, or a thousand. You can ask as many follow-up questions as you need. If it mentions a jury-selection rule you find bizarre, you can ask it to fabricate a debate between two people for and against that rule. You can ask why they don’t just do it this way or that way. You can ask for ten different analogies until you get it. Unlike a human, an A.I. is infinitely patient with you and any trouble you’re having.

After a half hour of free-form inquiry you can come away with a much better understanding of almost any topic – certainly better than what you’d get from virtually any 30-minute lecture or period of assigned reading.

Far more learning could happen in this world if more people could remain interested and attentive to what’s being said. Imagine a world in which 10x, or 100x as much real learning is happening, and across a far greater proportion of the population. That’s a different world.

Deserves a better path

Learning via A.I. interaction is especially powerful for examining your existing beliefs, and understanding why people disagree with you. It’s very hard to do this in open conversation with another human being. Conversation about charged topics is easily distorted by partisan judgments, emotional reactions, and fear of misunderstanding. These factors are massive impediments to learning about and understanding world issues.

You can tell Claude your current opinion about how crime should be dealt with, for example, or when we should intervene in foreign wars, and ask what it thinks you’re overlooking. You can tell it what your take is on the Vietnam War and ask it what Gore Vidal, Jane Fonda, or Douglas MacArthur might have said about that. You can have it write a mini-essay disputing your view, or even have it grill you on your position. There’s nobody to be offended, nobody to accuse you of asking the wrong questions or sounding like one of “them.”

Of course, what an A.I. says to you can be biased, or totally wrong, both factually and morally, but that’s true about humans (and their books) too. All the more reason to seek multiple framings of each question.

[NOTE: Judging by some of the comments I should perhaps emphasize that I’m very aware that AI chatbots are somewhat clunky at doing some of things I’m talking about above, and you should not assume that they’re right about anything. What I’m most excited about is where this tech will be in five or ten years.]

My excitement about this technology is not an indictment of books, not at all. I love books. Books are lindy. I love to sit in a chair and follow someone’s printed, sequential thoughts about a topic, when I can stay on the same wavelength. Books are wonderful, but they don’t serve every attempt to learn.  

Great, but not at everything

The future potential for A.I. assisted learning is incredible. We’re about to go from rubbing two sticks together to widespread access to lighters and matches. Say you’re studying for an exam in a dry topic like history or economics. Instead of force-reading a textbook, you can study with a small team of virtual tutors — subject matter experts who can explain to you the vital concepts using language you understand, and analogies related to your actual interests.

Imagine putting on some VR goggles and walking with a virtual Socrates on a shaded stoa, while he expertly leads you, question by question, evening by evening, to a genuine understanding of Hellenic philosophy (or for that matter, American history) at a level strong enough to ace a real professor’s exam.

Philosophy is useless? Tell me, Steven, how do you know that?

I can understand being sketched out by this kind of technology. It seems inevitable that A.I. will change the world profoundly, and quickly. People are going to absorb themselves, sometimes too deeply, in virtual spaces. (Actually this has been happening for decades.) Propaganda will have many new avenues. But what’s better to combat it than a much more knowledgeable population?

I don’t know what’s going to happen. I think it’s a safe bet, though, that one of those profound, A.I.-induced changes will be a massive increase the human capacity for learning and understanding.

For many people, on a personal level, it will feel like the Berlin Wall coming down. We’re about to catch up on a lot of missed opportunities.

***

{ 80 Comments }

Kim November 22, 2024 at 11:30 am

David, I hope you’re right about AI making the world a better place by facilitating more learning by more people. Just a couple weeks ago I realized that you can use it for therapy as well. I tried it out by inputting a prompt like, “Please act as my therapist and advise me about these family problems.” After each response, I asked more questions and revised my approach. It was extremely helpful to me, even showing empathy for some difficult situations I’ve had to face.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:11 pm

It’s great for just exploring your own thoughts, and getting some sort of feedback other than more of your own thoughts. I’ve used it for problem-solving, suggestions about ideas I have, etc.

The funny thing is one of the first chatbots was a therapy program called Eliza. It was supposed to simulate a psychiatrist. We had it for our Apple IIe back in the 80s. It was extremely basic, just 10 or 12 canned responses. Mostly it just said “Hmmmm, that’s interesting. Tell me more.”

{ Reply }

Laurie November 27, 2024 at 4:55 am

Dave this is wonderful! I just started with Claude. It seems to have limited options on the free plan. Do you pay for the plus plan? I think the value is worth it, I’m just wondering if I’m doing it wrong.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 27, 2024 at 10:50 am

@Laurie:

The only one I pay for is the ChatGPT suite. This gives access to GPT-4o which I believe is the latest version. Their app also gives access to Claude, and I’m not sure if my subscription removes some limitations I would otherwise have on Claude.

{ Reply }

Wesley November 22, 2024 at 11:40 am

thanks for this post. I’ve always struggled too with drifting off when reading. many times i pick books that i “should” read because they’re classics for example and then i just can’t stay with it and lose interest. cue unfinished book! like you I’ve still managed to read a lot but i agree that there’s almost an unfair advantage for those who can focus and absorb all that knowledge which is out there. it might be an exciting time for a while till the robots decide we’re expendable!

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:13 pm

For fiction, reading aloud has helped me tremendously. With nonfiction I often use an AI to fill in the gaps. You can even tell it what book you’re reading and what you don’t get about it, and often it can point to other passages in the text that illuminate the point.

{ Reply }

E November 22, 2024 at 12:31 pm

Yeah no. I’m unsubscribing after 14 years if this is the direction you’re going with this blog. Read John Searle’s Chinese Room thought experiment. A.I. doesn’t understand anything that you are asking it. When you asked it about “jury duty”, it used context and data scraped from the internet to generate an answer. It’s simulating having an understanding, but it has no clue was a “jury” actually is. I’ve used A.I. to figure out programming problems and half the time it generates unusable code but will happily print out a coherent narrative implying that it’s perfectly fine.

For a blog whose tagline is “Getting better at being human”, I would suggest you stop framing things as if reading that one more book and getting more knowledge from A.I. is somehow going to make you a better person. Maybe work on improving your relationships with other humans first.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:18 pm

I’m curious to understand your strong reaction here. Obviously this is not the first time you’ve disagreed with me if you’ve been reading for 14 years. What about this idea is so upsetting to you?

I’m aware that the AI doesn’t understand anything. It’s a language engine, informed by existing texts. It can reorganize ideas into language the user can understand, fill in blanks, locate helpful analogies, etc. It’s based on what real people have written.

{ Reply }

Random November 22, 2024 at 4:56 pm

What people like this are missing is that HUMAN BRAINS BEHAVE EXACTLY THE SAME AS AI. It’s just depressing and humbling now that we have to admit we are just neural networks that produce outputs in response to all the inputs we’ve accumulated over our lifetimes. The illusion of ‘understanding’ is simply that we’ve accumulated enough data that our outputs make sense for the recent inputs, for a given topic.

Also I suspect anyone talking about AI-generated bad code is not using the latest ChatGPT subscription. It’s gotten exponentially better in just months, and is now SCARY good. For better or for worse AI is an UNPRECEDENTED game-changer.

{ Reply }

E November 25, 2024 at 8:35 am

Nonsense. It’s good for boilerplate code, which is tedious but not difficult. The hardest part of writing software isn’t the coding, its understand the requirements properly in the first place.

Our brains our not completely like AI. Do you really think all you know can be distilled into lists of data? There’s a difference between book knowledge and experience knowledge. You can read all the books you want on parenthood, but you won’t know what it’s like until you actually become a parent. You can ask your friends who are are married, “What’s it like being married to X?”, and they’re tell you some facts, but you’ll never understand their marriage the to the depth that they do.

That experience “depth” is what AI doesn’t have, unless you flatten all human experience to mere sets of material, easily quantifiable facts. That’s a very machine like way of thinking, which again I’ll point out is a tonal shift from what I’ve observed about this blog for years.

David Cain November 23, 2024 at 9:54 am

@Random

That’s a good point, although I think most people don’t want to hear that. Humans are amazing, but we also process information in completely black-box ways. We can think about how we *think* we’re coming to a particular conclusion, but that’s just another narrative that is probably completely wrong. We have no idea how the words we’re saying even come into our minds and out of our mouths. It’s totally opaque.

I’m not a programmer but the ones I follow all seem to think LLMs have already completely changed the industry. If I was still studying computer programming I’d be using it all the time, that’s for sure.

{ Reply }

E November 25, 2024 at 8:24 am

Why did it provoke such a strong reaction? It reads like an AI puff piece article. I was half expecting you to reveal that you were offering a paid course on AI at the end of your article.

We are more educated and have more access to knowledge than our ancestors and we’re more depressed, less social, and more isolated. I don’t think our problem is not being able to consume information fast enough. I see this article and compare it to the ones where you talked about the joys of disconnecting from technology or mindfully walking across a parking lot and wonder what the heck happened.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 25, 2024 at 10:54 am

This blog has always been about the inner human experience. I see something extremely interesting in how AI allows for a new, adaptable way to aggregate and organize information, which our human brains can make use of. You evidently don’t see what I see, and that’s fine. Have you really resonated with every article I’ve written except this one? I go on some pretty wild lines of thinking on this site, I can’t imagine even a single a person feeling everything I write.

{ Reply }

Brian November 22, 2024 at 12:37 pm

I know your blog is about AI, and you’ve probably tried a variety of methods to improving your reading skills. In case you haven’t come across Jim Kwik, I’m quite impressed with him and his methods, and I’ve used them to increase my own reading speed and comprehension. I invite you to take a look: https://start.kwikbrain.com/reading-promo?utm_source=Google+Ads&utm_medium=Branded+Search+Reading&gc_id=13143069792&h_ad_id=522324016547&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiA9IC6BhA3EiwAsbltOBwYgbt3QGAfLJM7B4TqRXQKlghInCkYOyd2jceupEVu9MgxD9FA8hoCiKEQAvD_BwE
Ciao,
Brian

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 4:13 pm

I will take a look, thanks Brian.

{ Reply }

John November 22, 2024 at 12:45 pm

Thanks David

I am distrustful of AI and so want to discount it as to having any value. Yet I have gained just enough wisdom in my 61 years that AI is likely not going anywhere very fast (I look at the major bet investors have on Tesla as partial proof).

So rather than dismiss it outright, I feel it is important for me to explore AI to see how it can work for me, in my unique life situation. I will be cautious mind you, for one can experience woe by blindly following that which they do not know / understand.

So thank you for this. The tone may not be perfect, but I do believe that USING AI to help me, can lead me to Getting better at being human.

jb

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:20 pm

I think this is the right attitude. It is a tool, just like a calculator or a spreadsheet, that can be useful. It’s just so incredibly useful that it’s going to become very prominent in modern life, and we should be wary. It is neither wholly good or bad.

{ Reply }

Oleg November 22, 2024 at 12:49 pm

That’s probably the first article on your truly brilliant blog that I totally don’t resonate with.
:(

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:21 pm

Well that’s a pretty good batting average then :) I don’t even agree with half my old articles.

I wouldn’t expect everyone to resonate with this. People are in very different places with AI and I understand the uneasiness.

{ Reply }

Rae November 22, 2024 at 7:38 pm

Thank you David. I just used Claude to teach me some basic earth science. The A.I. was helpful as I asked it to break things down specific to my location. So, I went to the anthropic website to find that Amazon is a major player in the game. I’m concerned about this – sure, it was a very simple learning session, but I think that I would hold off on anything related to my personal or mental health, financial situation and so on. I wonder how Amazon will function as it gathers more and more information about us. Thoughts?

{ Reply }

David Cain November 23, 2024 at 9:50 am

@ Rae:

On that question I don’t know. There are tools for limiting the amount of data you give to big companies (VPNs, etc). Overall though it is a data-driven world, and people tend to give up more and more personal data (often voluntarily) in exchange for tailored services that make use of that data. It isn’t an issue specific to AI, though, and there are many ways to use AI tools without disclosing personal information.

{ Reply }

DiscoveredJoys November 22, 2024 at 12:55 pm

I too find slogging through a dense book disheartening. My suspicion is that many worthy writers (especially philosophers) write long screeds justifying relatively straightforward opinions. Plus some of them subtly move from one statement to another gradually changing definitions and bending the argument in their favour.

I’ve found that my best approach in non-fiction is to read the Introduction. Generally the introduction covers all the main points in straightforward prose, sets out the purpose of the following chapters, and makes any sleight of hand more obvious. If it all hangs together you can still choose to skip to the interesting bits.

For fictional books if the writing doesn’t grab my attention in the first chapter or so then I discard the book (easy if it is a Kindle unlimited).

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:23 pm

Introduction and table of contents often contain the whole thesis, for sure. Then you can dip in where you need detail.

{ Reply }

Susan November 22, 2024 at 1:20 pm

I kept reading and waiting for the punchline, thinking the article was perhaps satire. At one point I even wondered if this article was written by AI, because it was so unlike other articles that I loved so much, such as the one about going deep and not wide and the piece about walking through a parking lot. I struggle too with my attention and completing books due to some recent traumas, but I am of the mind, right or wrong, that it is good for me to do hard things.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:33 pm

I don’t disagree that it’s good to do hard things. I certainly didn’t say that, nor did I say we shouldn’t read books. If you’re learning math only using an abacus, when calculators exist, just because it’s harder, that might be good for the character in some vague sense but also greatly limit how much math you’re going to end up learning.

What’s wrong with using a new technological tool to learn, especially if it allows you a degree of education that wouldn’t be possible otherwise? Are you against students making use of the internet to learn? Wikipedia? I really don’t know what people are reacting to here.

{ Reply }

Rocky November 22, 2024 at 1:43 pm

Howdy David…. Your old pal, Rocky here…..This is an excellent post,
with the potential to help a significant number of people grow in their knowledge and understanding of themselves and the world around them.
Additionally, however many somewhat evolved humans you reach with this post, you can bet the ranch that they will not keep their astonishing experience a secret. Thus they will contribute to the massive snowball effect already underway.
AI got a bad rap when it first came on the scene…It’s going to take over the world….start a nuclear war…etc
It will, in fact, change the world, but as have pointed out here, Davy, it will be a very large change for the better!
Many thanks for this brilliant post!

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:41 pm

Thanks Rocky. There are definitely a lot of question marks with AI. I honestly have no idea what the average person thinks about it, or how it will change the world. It makes sense for people to be wary, because it is obviously very powerful technology. But I think some people aren’t considering that it might massively expand people’s access to education, healthcare, and a lot of profoundly positive things. I think this is more likely than the paperclip-generator dystopia scenario.

{ Reply }

Mac November 22, 2024 at 2:12 pm

Books do so much more than giving a response to a question. Books steer your thoughts into unknown territory, paving new ways to explore as the author guides you through his thoughts.
This requires energy, time and attention which deplete quicker as the contents are more intense and hard.
You can read parts of a book, and pick it up later when the energy, time and energy is back up.
A response from Claude will require the same energy, time and attention. It can provide different methods in how to provide information, but it will not guide you into unknown territories, unless you ask it to. And how can you ask for something which you don’t know exists (unknown). Unless, again, guided in a step by step explanation, which require time, energy and attention.
People have less and less patience and accept less and less that true learning takes the time, energy and attention.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 2:54 pm

Absolutely agree there is no replacement for books.

I disagree with the rest of your post though. First it’s important to note that the current state of Claude is not the culmination of AI’s usefulness, it’s just the very beginning of it. Even today, an LLM can bring you the written work of real people verbatim, by finding for you a pertinent passage or chapter from Montaigne or Alan Watts or whoever, given what you’re currently trying to learn. Even if all it did was locate for you already-published human writing pertinent to your questions, and you did all your learning from that, it would be fantastically useful.

I think part of the confusion around this post is that people think I’m advocating for a replacement of human knowledge with generated computer text, which is not at all what I’m talking about. I imagine AI helping us access and onboard actual human knowledge, not serve as a cheap simulation of it.

{ Reply }

R November 22, 2024 at 2:27 pm

And then everything AI tells you, you have to go fact check. Because you have no way to know whether it’s hallucinating at you or pulling from unreliable sources, or just plain misunderstanding you. So either you accept what it says at face value, knowingly accepting that you are trusting an extremely fallible “teacher”, or you spend even MORE time looking up the actual info in the sources the AI was using in the first place. I don’t see the time savings at all.

“All the more reason to seek multiple framings of each question.” ??? This doesn’t address the problem at all. This is like asking your compulsively lying uncle the question a few different times, in different ways, hoping maybe he’ll not lie maybe the third or fourth time. You are still asking an UNRELIABLE source for information, and you still have no idea where it’s getting its info from. Maybe all the info it’s giving you about juries is how California does it, because the internet contains more info on California procedures than other states. If it did, how would you know?

I can see your point, that the personalized back and forth tutor experience is circumventing specific issues you have with taking in information, but come on. AI chatbots are not close to being reliably correct, and everything they say needs to be fact checked even more than a relevant teacher or tutor or author’s words. At least a real person comes with credentials and can point you to their sources.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 3:23 pm

Please see my response to Mac above.

Claude or ChatGPT represent a very early, clunky form of this technology. This is the Wright brothers plane, not the F-35. I guess I should have emphasized that more. I’m certainly not saying Claude in its current state can replace reading or school, or anything like that. I’m saying that having a hyper-adaptable software that can engage you from wherever you are with a given topic, is a new and extremely useful kind of technology.

You do have to check things, as we always have. I am aware that these very early LLMs are not in their current state giving you answers you can bet your life on. The point is what’s possible — this tech is already very useful for finding your way into a topic, getting breakdowns of its basics, getting definitions right when you need them, asking for common arguments for and against something, etc, so imagine how good it will be in five or ten years. Even if all it could do was find appropriate verbatim passages from existing human work, that alone is revolutionary. I’m sorry if I’ve been unable to explain why this is so promising.

{ Reply }

Gabby November 22, 2024 at 2:48 pm

Hi David
I can see there’s a lot of disagreement here, but I do get where you’re coming from on this one. I too want to be a better informed human about the world around me.

I too have mountains of unread books. I attempt to read the news every day. However I struggle with the time and energy required as I have so many competing demands with work, kids and life in general.

My solution recently has been watching news and documentaries on the public broadcaster in my country (Australia), as I’ve discovered it’s much easier for my brain to absorb information in that format (the book snob past version of me would habe been horrified). I know it’s no substitute for a well written book for a deep dive on specialised subjects),but it’s a sure slight better than an unread book!

I’m going to take up your suggestion of using AI. I’ve dipped my toes in to help my kids get an overview of topics for school assignments but I can see there’s many different ways I never thought to use it!

The only point on which I really disagree is that AI will generally lead to a more knowledgeable population. This was expected from the advent of the internet , yet we are now drowning in a sea of lies and disinformation. I worry AI will amplify this.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 3:46 pm

Thanks Gabby. There are a lot of different ways to use an LLM, and we’re just figuring them out. It does take some playing around.

I’m not sure that we were ever not “drowning in a sea of lies.” People do know more about more things post-internet, which is good in one way but also means there’s more superficial and incorrect information in our heads. Humans generally not great at epistemology, but that’s more a matter of evolution than technology. Humans are very vulnerable to manipulation. AI is almost certainly going to amplify a lot of human activities, which will be both good and bad.

{ Reply }

Robert November 22, 2024 at 3:00 pm

With the intention of reading your post after completing the task I was currently working on, I opened up a new tab to it. Once ready, I made a coffee and sat down to read it.
As it turned out, you were essentially describing what I had just finished doing. I had just had a “discussion” with ChatGPT where I asked it to explore both sides of an issue that has been troubling me. It provided reasonably unbiased views of both, comparing and contrasting them in clear language. But I do attribute this, in large part, to my having written my queries properly.
I agree that AI will be a transformative educational tool, for those who know how to use it properly. In fact, I expect it will be transformative in almost every aspect of our lives, not just learning. As with any technology, it will have quirks and limitations. As individuals, and as a society, we need to understand these limitations and compensate for them. Ultimately, though, I believe we are at a “genie is granting your wish” point in human history across all fields, not just in education.
And, while my issue is still troubling me, my understanding of why is now much better.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 3:56 pm

I agree with you that it will transform just about everything in some way. It’s just too useful for processing patterns, and any large-scale operation is full of patterns.

As for the current state of LLMs, the case you describe above has maybe been the most useful for me. You can explore a sensitive issue from multiple perspectives without antagonizing or offending anyone, or spilling over into related topics, etc.

{ Reply }

Holly November 22, 2024 at 3:14 pm

I’m (perhaps naively) surprised at some of the comments against this article, but I’m very glad I’ve read them. I’m a strong proponent of using AI for self-led learning for precisely the reasons you’ve outlined in this great article, so I’m coming at this from a bit of a biased perspective. After having taught some of my non-tech friends to use it, I’ve always liked the idea of getting more involved in teaching less tech savvy people that AI doesn’t have to be intimidating. Reading some of these less enthusiastic comments has really given me some food for thought on how to approach that!

Also, just throwing my suggestion in there for Perplexity.ai, which provides references for those worried about fact checking, and Pi.ai (app is better than web) which is entirely free and in my opinion has a better voice tech than paid GPT-4. I have long spoken conversations with Pi, and use it daily to help me learn new concepts.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 4:10 pm

Hi Holly. Yeah I think people are assuming that I believe LLMs in their current state are as reliable as a knowledgeable person on the subject. They’re not, but they’re still already very useful if you’re aware of their limitations. I’m mainly excited about how good this tech will be in the future.

I had heard of Perplexity but only tried it just now. This is really fantastic. It’s an incredible time to be alive.

{ Reply }

Tara November 22, 2024 at 3:23 pm

I am old and it had never occurred to me to ask ChatGPT questions to get information. Thanks for this interesting and useful tip!

{ Reply }

David Cain November 22, 2024 at 4:12 pm

It can do so much. You can even ask it for ways to use it that you might not have thought of.

{ Reply }

yorch November 23, 2024 at 3:14 am

My take, after tinkering with it for a bit, is that AI works very well with creating gibberish that doesn’t really serve a purpose, say: cover letters, introductions and conclusions to long texts, images… I use it academically since my rater is more worried about whether I put and Intro and Conclussions than about the contents thereof, and I don’t feel it’s worth putting an effort -and part of my soul- in something no one cares about.
However, when it comes to being technical or getting into details about something, AI fails to give a good answer, and given the quality of the contents of most of the internet and how statistics work, I doubt it will ever get good at it.
Also, I think that at the beginning of the TV era, TV was seen pretty much as AI is described in the article. I don’t think anyone believes that TV has resulted in a more educated society…
Still, always interested in what you have to say, David =)

{ Reply }

David Cain November 23, 2024 at 9:26 am

If I understand you correctly, you believe LLMs are about as good as they’re going to get. I completely disagree, but if you’re right then it probably isn’t going to revolutionize education. I’m not sure how anyone following this technology would think that though; it gets better all the time.

{ Reply }

yorch November 25, 2024 at 2:06 am

I fail to share the hype. Internet and TV were to be awesome tools to educate, and I think most educated people still go back to books for a reason.
Perphaps the effort taken in writing and reading books acts as a filter of content both for reader and writer? Yes, there are bad and biased books, but the effort put in reading it already asks something from the reader, making it a fruitful effort somehow? (Note the question marks, possibly my bias towards books comes from being a bookworm =P)
If I understand AI correctly, it’s statistics (what the majority thinks) + personalization (what you want to read). I’m using it lately for technical stuff -mainly regulations on electric power supply- and it fails to deliver good or accurate answers. The phrasing is absolutely great and convincing, the content is wrong. And this is what I would consider a perfect task for an AI: get a bunch of papers with legal jargon about electric equipment and tell me the important points.

{ Reply }

Disappointed November 23, 2024 at 5:25 am

As a long-time reader who usually enjoys your blog, this post is a letdown. It’s a classic motte-and-bailey about what “AI” could be in the future that minimizes the actual (poor) experience you get using ChatGPT, Gemini, etc. In particular this edit is a disappointing cop-out:

“[NOTE: Judging by some of the comments I should perhaps emphasize that I’m very aware that AI chatbots are somewhat clunky at doing some of things I’m talking about above, and you should not assume that they’re right about anything. What I’m most excited about is where this tech will be in five or ten years.]”

Proposing AI can be used as a tool to do hard things then falling back to “if” and “and” and “in five or ten years” is an uncharacteristic cop-out. By adding this note you’re weakening your position to “if it works this way in the future…” If my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a bicycle.

Asking a black box to make something approachable with wildly unpredictable results is as far as you can get from doing the hard task. AI tools are not a help for getting deep knowledge, and your edit could have come right from OpenAI’s marketing department. I’m reminded of Mark Fisher saying his students who didn’t want to read Nietzsche didn’t understand the value of Nietzsche was grappling with the difficulty.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 23, 2024 at 9:34 am

I would argue it’s already profoundly helpful for learning certain things more quickly — that is, as long as you’re aware of what it can and can’t do well right now, which is hard to miss if you actually use it. If you’re trying to learn to use Excel spreadsheets or study a programming language, it is very useful. It’s useful for learning real languages too, at least as much as something like duolingo is. However, some people seem to think that it can’t be profoundly useful if it makes mistakes or sometimes gives you wrong answers (not that our conventional means don’t do that too). The human at the user end does have to use their own brain, yes. If you’re aware of AI’s current limitations, it’s extremely useful. If you think it’s supposed to be infallible, then I can understand being skeptical.

The fact that it will be much better in five or ten years is undeniable IMO.

{ Reply }

EM November 23, 2024 at 5:34 pm

Can confirm – I use AI *constantly* at work for learning and implementing technical things in unfamiliar tools. I don’t need to read an entire book on javascript in order to implement something simple but useful, and I learn through doing. I can ask the AI to explain a concept in javascript in a way that I’ll understand it given my experience with a different tool, for example. And yes – sometimes the AI gets it wrong, but identifying and critiquing that also helps me learn. Using AI tools, things that would have taken weeks to figure out now take days or less.

{ Reply }

Dan Bartlett November 23, 2024 at 6:18 am

ChatGPT recently helped me finally get ADHD. I told it the parts that made sense to me and those that didn’t. I told it why I was suspicious that I had it and my family history. I asked it for examples of symptoms and told it which ones resonated. It then told me why that might be and what other symptoms to look out for. Each time it was able to thread in what I’d previously told it into its next answer. I learned an awful lot in those few conversations vs reading 30 generic webpages that are addressing an abstract audience, instead of an individual with a particular understanding of things.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 23, 2024 at 9:39 am

This is a great example of the kind of helpful exercise I’m talking about. The skeptics seem to believe that mistakes or erroneous information disqualifies it as a learning tool. As long as you’re using your own brain though, it is fantastic at working your way around a question.

{ Reply }

E November 25, 2024 at 10:50 am

Good grief. Please don’t self diagnose medical conditions via chat bots. It’s bad enough that for years people have been erroneously self diagnosing via searching WebMD and google.

And David Cain, you can’t seriously in your other reply to me say that you understand that AI “doesn’t know anything” and then endorse usage like this person is doing. You wouldn’t genuinely recommend this if that if you believed it. Despite your words, you’re behaving as if you do genuinely believe that AI has human level knowledge and experience.

This is mental health he’s talking about, not someone querying ChatGPT for history trivia

{ Reply }

David Cain November 25, 2024 at 11:06 am

It doesn’t know anything and neither does a book. It outputs a collection of words that can suggest thoughts/ideas to the reader. Maybe a given thought has some merit, even one derived from a statistical reconstruction of other human texts. You still have to use your brain, you still have to question and verify things. You talk like I’m recommending people surrender their will to computers or something. It’s up to the user how much stock to put in a given idea or possibility. This goes without saying. What’s next, a dire warning that I might see something untrue on TV? Say it ain’t so!

{ Reply }

E November 25, 2024 at 11:49 am

If you understood, you’d see the folly of asking for medical advice from a thing that has no clue what you just asked it. You seriously don’t see why that’s a problem for medical conditions? There’s a reason why medical websites have huge disclaimers about making sure people consult with doctors. I’m done arguing with you. Take care

Dan Bartlett November 26, 2024 at 3:03 am

Yeesh. I said ChatGPT helped me “get” ADHD; I did not say it was the sole (or even the most important) source in a self-diagnosis. That is actually still an open question for me.

It was just very helpful for feeding in the parts that made sense, the bits that didn’t and getting some tailored leads on topics I might explore next. A research assistant that adapted to my evolving understanding. I think this is a great use case. Of course, you must verify and have a functioning critical faculty, as with any modern medium.

{ Reply }

Bay November 23, 2024 at 7:38 am

Look, mate. I’ve been reading a while. Have you tried adderall? I’m deadly serious right now. You said you’d do just about anything to be able to sit and focus for long periods of time — and that’s exactly what adderall does for me.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 23, 2024 at 9:35 am

I have. The side effects were terrible for me.

{ Reply }

Pipsterate November 23, 2024 at 8:29 am

Definitely agree with this. AI can be extremely useful for tutoring, especially when you’re trying to understand foreign concepts. It can explain the difference between two Chinese words that sound identical in English, and it can find German words for concepts that don’t have a direct English equivalent. It can rapidly summarize things you’ve half forgotten, and introduce you to things you’ve never heard of.

Obviously it goes without saying that in many ways all AI is offering is a shallow facsimile of real thought, and much of its information is fake, but nevertheless it’s quite useful. A book can’t think either, and plenty of books contain false information, but nobody would say books aren’t useful.

It’s also just plain wrong to think using AI is somehow incompatible with reading or with thinking, like it’s a replacement for books. I’ve actually started reading more books, often very serious books, after I made an account to use Claude. Difficult books are less intimidating, and less lonely, when you know you’ll be able to ask questions about them.

Maybe this is uncharitable of me, but I think a lot of resistance to AI has to do with human ego. People don’t want to believe a machine could ever accomplish special human tasks like writing or making art. It hurts our pride, it diminishes our sense of selfhood. But if I know anything about humanity, it’s that pride and resistance to change are some of our most fatal weaknesses.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 23, 2024 at 9:45 am

I think you nailed it here. I wish I’d said it this well.

AI doesn’t obviate the need for human thinking, it just provides an extremely versatile reference tool to apply to your own thinking. The user still has to use their own brain, and be aware that not all the information they take in is accurate, regardless of how that information is assembled. This has been true of every other information medium.

{ Reply }

Mary November 23, 2024 at 1:09 pm

Coincidentally, right before reading this, I read an article on The Atlantic about how AI is going to redefine how we search for information and as a result, we will miss out on the wonder of digging deep into topics because we will be satisfied with the surface level responses we’ll receive. Think I am with The Atlantic on this one.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 24, 2024 at 3:57 pm

I don’t see why it would make humans any less curious, it just increases ease of access to information. I want to dig into topics, that’s the whole appeal for me.

{ Reply }

Chris Benson November 23, 2024 at 8:52 pm

Hi David,
I’ve been using Copilot in Edge as a personal tutor, and I think you are absolutely correct that there’s a huge value in filling in my ignorance with summaries and links to actual factual articles by actual humans.

I also spent 30 years selling nothing but audiobooks at Audio Editions. I primarily managed the IT department.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 24, 2024 at 4:03 pm

Being able to get a summary at any level of detail on basically anything is so useful. I also appreciate how your query can be very unformed and off-the-cuff, when it isn’t clear exactly what information you want to find out.

{ Reply }

Karen Wentworth November 23, 2024 at 11:40 pm

I’m in agreement with all your points, probably because I have been using even clunky old Chat GPT 3.5 for what you’ve mentioned, and it has been great and useful for precisely what you’ve said. Bing has been good too, as free LLMs go. (Haven’t tried Claude.)

But I have a but. It hasn’t helped me with my problem of having lost my ability to read for depth; in fact it has worsened it. And you did address that too, I know, both here and in your “reading aloud” post, but this is my fear in the development of AI. LLMs will get better, for sure, but we’ll get worse at depth reading, because the pace of life is hectic and we’ve gotten superficial and lost our ability to concentrate (speaking broadly here). My pile of unread non-fiction paper books remains disappointingly tall.

Plus, I’m lazy. Of course we (read:I) must be better at using LLMs as a starting point to subject matter and then take the next step to depth ourselves. You address this too. But will we do that? That requires discipline and determination. AI facilitates short cuts. Useful short cuts, for sure, I’m in full agreement with you. But I fear we’ll get even more lost in the sea of superficiality.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 24, 2024 at 4:08 pm

My suspicion is that our decreasing attention spans are mainly due to smartphone usage, and all of the rapid-fire sort of content we browse now.

Ultimately we will get better at what we do, and worse at what we get away from doing. That is up to how the individual uses the tools and devices available to them, but I’m sure AI in all its forms will shift those population-level trends a lot.

{ Reply }

Toni November 24, 2024 at 5:15 pm

Yes David, I agree with the sense that attention spans are diminishing as a result of smart phone use.
I am 70 years old and learned to read in the 1950s, learned to meditate in the 1970s. Writers are getting better at writing. I will read well-written, recently written books. Writers who know how to get to the point without faffing about. I get your point about learning from AI. Also know we learn by living.

{ Reply }

Jim K November 24, 2024 at 7:30 pm

Hey David,
Are you using a paid subscription for these AI inquiries? I’ve been messing about with the free ChatGPT but what I get for responses is kind of sad. Just wondering if you’re paying for these “better” results? Thanks for posting this.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 24, 2024 at 8:01 pm

I pay for the ChatGPT suite, yes. What it returns to you depends on what you are asking and how. It takes some experimentation to start to see the many ways you can inquire. Perplexity is free and more complex than GPT — try taking a particular question you’ve always wanted to know about (such as a common term you vaguely understand but not really) and dig into it. If it leaves something out, ask followups.

{ Reply }

Cynthia November 25, 2024 at 8:59 am

Just be careful with this. I’m a scientist. When our students use ChatGPT to “understand” something, they tend to come away with a very surface level understanding of it, because the AI is really just a word scraper that is trying to complete sentences the way a human would complete them. There’s no depth there, and the AI can not generate a novel synthesis of ideas in any way shape or form, not even to the point where it can write a good insightful undergraduate research paper. And of course not having had to do the work to understand something and re-explain it by synthesizing in their own heads, the students don’t understand WHY it’s wrong. “But ChatGPT said…” uh, no, you have to apply critical thinking to that because it’s either wrong or shallow way too often. And the idea that people are using it as a therapist (when AIs have notably steered people towards suicide during the course of a “conversation”) or a replacement for a dead relative that they miss is disquieting at best. Large language models are really useful for some tightly focused well defined problems in research, where they have been trained by experts on good quality data, but when you scrape the whole internet and put a jumbled mix of right answers and wrong answers and straight out shitposts together to simulate an answer you get what you might expect.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 25, 2024 at 10:45 am

Guys. Try to look forward a little here. I’m not claiming a blind dependence on ChatGPT in its current state is a replacement for conventional information sources. I am aware there is a problem with students being lazy and trying to pass their quizzes without any real attempt to learn anything. Of course they’re doing that.

I’m saying two things:

1. Some people have figured out how to do very useful things with LLMs in their current state. (And some people have not)
2. LLMs are always improving, and the future potential is incredible and undeniable imo.

{ Reply }

Cynthia November 25, 2024 at 9:03 am

ChatGPT is pretty notorious for straight out making up articles that don’t exist when you ask it to add references to a text. It might look like it’s linking out to something real but you follow it and there’s nothing there. I’ve played with this quite a bit hoping it could be a useful learning tool for my students but it’s not at all reliable for anything important.

That said it’s probably fine if you need a high-level summary of how jury duty works.

{ Reply }

Vilx- November 25, 2024 at 4:46 pm

Disclaimer: I haven’t even tried AI yet. :)

What you say sounds true, but I can’t help but feel a little Deja Vu. ‘Bout 30 years or so ago we praised the up and coming Internet in a similar way. Infinite knowledge at your fingertips! Entire libraries just a click away! Videos and voice recordings, and so much more! Surely, we’re about to enter a golden age where we’ll all be wiser and smarter and all the worlds problems will get solved in a jiffy.

Yeah, it… didn’t really work out that way.

I wonder what the future of AI holds? What are the pitfalls that we cannot even fathom yet?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against AI. For better or worse it’s here to stay, and it’s just getting off the ground. It just feels like… I should get some popcorn. This should be interesting to watch.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 26, 2024 at 3:48 pm

Well I mean, the phrase “golden age where we’ll all be wiser and smarter and all the worlds problems will get solved in a jiffy” is a bit of a strawman. The internet has proved *extremely* useful and transformative, and in fact almost everyone uses it every day. I don’t know if anyone seriously claimed that it would solve all of our problems in a jiffy, or not cause any new problems. But it’s undeniable that it has transformed how business, education, and life in general operate. Most of the modern amenities around you depend on this new internet functionality in some way. AI is going to have a similarly world-changing effect, and of course it much of what it will do is in turn enabled by internet connectivity.

There are undoubtedly pitfalls we don’t even grasp yet.

{ Reply }

Laurie November 27, 2024 at 5:03 am

I just read through some of the responses. I’m laughing so hard. Dave you are a great sport. As a fellow ADHD er who loved to read but had a lot of challenges retaining what I want, AI has been a game changer for me. My original question may have been answered. You pay for the chat gbt? Not the Claude? I may try Claude. I had a blast using it yesterday. AI is another fantastic tool to help me thrive! As are you! Keep putting out your brilliance into the world and thank you.

{ Reply }

David Cain November 27, 2024 at 10:53 am

I pay for ChatGPT, which gives me access to the latest version, GPT 4o without query limits. As far as I know I have only ever used the free version of Claude.

Someone else suggested Perplexity, which I have just started playing around with. It’s neat because it links to sources in its responses.

{ Reply }

Rebel13 December 2, 2024 at 1:07 pm

Hi, I didn’t read through all the comments, but I did search the page for “environment” and got 0/0. This is the piece that I see missing in every article advocating we all consult ChatGPT et al. about our every personal whim — the environmental impact. Why are seemingly well informed, well intentioned folks such as yourself not aware of this problem?

“A request made through ChatGPT, an AI-based virtual assistant, consumes 10 times the electricity of a Google Search, reported the International Energy Agency.”

Is it really worth it??

https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/ai-has-environmental-problem-heres-what-world-can-do-about

{ Reply }

David Cain December 2, 2024 at 4:00 pm

I’m aware people are concerned about energy usage and I’ve done some research on it. Estimates vary — some say an LLM query uses about the same energy as a Google search (0.1-1 Wh) and some say it uses a few times that.

Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t think that’s very much. Keep in mind that driving a car for *one mile* uses ~400 Wh. An energy-efficient refrigerator might use 400,000 Wh in a year. Average annual energy consumption for a US home is about 10 MWh.

Energy usage should definitely be monitored of course, but it has to be weighed in proportion to the benefits. Much of what’s exciting about AI is that it can make many energy-intensive processes more efficient. Fifty years ago you might have driven to the library to look up what you could now find out in ten seconds using half a watt-hour of electricity. To assert that AI is flatly bad for the environment is a bit simplistic imo. There is definitely a movement to paint it as “bad” though — I’m not sure what the motivations are for that.

{ Reply }

Jon Howell December 2, 2024 at 2:11 pm

“But what’s better to combat it than a much more knowledgeable population?”

Speaking for my home country of the USA: This assumes a population that *wants* to make the effort to learn. Yet information tech has fostered an ever increasing number of people who favor herd compliance over critical thinking.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m with you 100%. I am so, so stoked about AI’s potential for good. It’s helped me tremendously. But people remain people. Like the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them drink.

We may get through this. The need to live for the good of all may drive thought and events once again. But the depth and breadth of damage that misused information tech has caused is unlike anything in history. AI is poised to outdo Facebook in this regard, and the billionaire elite and the bought politicians have no interest in changing our trajectory as long as the increasing subjugation of the 99.99% serves their insane greed.

{ Reply }

David Cain December 2, 2024 at 4:07 pm

Agreed but I think that has probably always been true, it’s just more obvious in the era of online hot takes, where we are given tiny rewards (“likes”, “upvotes”) for sharing our opinions.

Many people are not interested in learning, yes, but consider that how interested people are is partly a function of how pleasant or unpleasant it has been to learn, given the current state of education. Being made to listen to unlistenable lectures or read unreadable textbooks is undoubtedly going to turn a significant number of people away from self-directed learning who might otherwise have been interested and able.

There will be problems coming along with the solutions, for sure. But the upside is going to be exponential, and the downside might just be a geometric continuation of the current trend of disengagement, siloing, etc.

{ Reply }

Mike December 5, 2024 at 3:43 am

Thank you for this article, I thought it and the subsequent comments were very thought provoking. Although I have plenty of concerns about how AI can and will be used in nefarious ways, I do agree that it has lots of benefits to support learning. I’ve been using it recently to help me learn Italian and, whilst it isn’t always perfect and can sometimes make mistakes, I find that on the whole it’s been excellent in helping me create flash cards, understand grammatical concepts and practice written phrases. I’ve been able to ask it to clarify things and check my understanding just as your article suggests.

I would argue it is actually helping me, in the long term at least, to forge better connections with other humans: by improving my language skills without the cost of tutor whenever I want to, I’m better able to converse with other people without needing to rely on my phone to translate. I’m looking forward to it improving to the level where I can practice full, fluid conversations about any subject. I’m not sure it will necessarily replace language tutors, but it’s certainly a helpful resource.

{ Reply }

David Cain December 6, 2024 at 2:15 pm

Language learning is one of the most promising applications imo. We already have the technology to set up a reasonably good, voice-activated “partner” you can have second-language conversations with while you’re folding laundry or whatever, and it’s only going to get better.

{ Reply }

situs togel 4d December 9, 2024 at 5:07 am

It was thinking about whether I could utilize this review on my other site, I will connect it back to your site though.Great Thanks.

{ Reply }

Larry S December 12, 2024 at 3:35 am

I use AI chatbots as a tool all the time. They are great for getting inspiration, and for giving you that small initial push on a topic you have no idea how to approach.

But they are terrible sources of information. Here is the problem: If I had enough knowledge on a topic to judge the quality of the AI response, why would I need the AI in the first place?

Undoubtedly, there will be many situations where AI will give you excellent guidance. But there will also be situations where it misleads you severely, and you – as a learner with the best of intentions – have no real way to tell when that happens.

{ Reply }

Nina December 12, 2024 at 7:37 pm

So, an uncomfortable truth here is that these tools are designed, owned and controlled by a handful of Republican-aligned tech bros. I think they’re going to gradually skew the algorithms to favour their specific worldview — so, towards libertarianism and Elon-style disdain for women, for example — if they aren’t doing this already. I mean, why wouldn’t they? Who could possibly stop them? You can hardly avoid AI being shoved in your face everywhere, all the time, already. We are a captive audience for their manipulation of information itself. (God, I sound like a lunatic, don’t I? But here we are…)

Anyway. I’m glad it’s helping you, but please stay vigilant and protect those piles of unread books at all costs. They may be your ticket back to sanity one day.

{ Reply }

Leave a Comment

{ 1 Trackbacks }

Desktop version

Raptitude is an independent blog by . Some links on this page may be affiliate links, which means I might earn a commission if you buy certain things I link to. In such cases the cost to the visitor remains the same.