This goes with calculator to do basic math, contacts apps to store phone numbers instead of remembering them, and watches to tell time imo.
Sure we could use our brain power with old techniques to do these, but why? I don't want to do any of these. I'd rather use that brain power for other problems.
Same with maps.
I don't want to have to store a bunch of location or routing data in my head.
I think what you're pointing towards is going from having problems to solve to not having any problems to solve.
That's definitely a danger, but right now is still early in the AI era so obviously it'll feel like we went from solving problems to letting the new tool solve them for us.
You are confusing faculty with records. The ability to navigate by sense of direction. The ability to memorize numbers. The ability to think clearly by yourself.
Watcha gonna do if big tech takes away your access to the outsourced brain, dear?
You are not storing these things in your head at the expense of anything else. You’re “training” the existing underutilized capacity in your brain for something useful.
> I don't want to have to store a bunch of location or routing data in my head.
hmmm, given how closely memory is linked to spatial navigation sense, and not just in humans, but in evolutionary terms-- think squirrels remembering where they buried nuts, birds and fish remembering migration routes, ...
suggests the ability to store location/routing is foundational to much of intelligence.
Even simple tasks, typing, for example, depends on my knowing where the keys are. Imagine if your keyboard re-organized its keymap randomly every third keystroke.
I thought that it was discovered that squirrels don't remember where nuts were stored. They just kinda guess and enough of them doing storing and then some make it work on average.
The book SAT Wars has arguments for and against and the striking thing for me was that some in admissions believe in a concept called crafting a class: the applicants are input into the admissions officer’s artisanal contribution to producing a class that they believe would be good for the university to have.
The idea of a standard bar and so on does sound like it would interfere with such a process.
I always did find it interesting that US notions of anti-racism required treating individuals not as individuals but as racial representatives. It’s a local quirk of the culture of the land, I suppose, that one’s primary identification here is one’s skin colour.
America's vapid fixation with race is ridiculous especially since it uses race as a proxy for social stratum when it could just be addressing class issues directly instead. If only there were some history of forms that parents fill out every year showing their income to the government that is more-or-less vetted to some degree—too bad we don't have such a thing that students could use to prove social stratum! Plus, what the hell is race anyway? An unethical tip one could give to university applicants would be to claim membership to the most beneficial group because it's not like university admissions has any way of proving your "race". Construct any fabricated story that'll get the most approval and maximize your chances of getting into a top university.
Unfortunately, the fixation with race in America doesn't start nor stop at college admissions. College admissions is probably the last place where it tilts in the direction of certain minority groups.
I agree that we should just stop using race everywhere and we should crack down on it -- but I think college wouldn't be where my energy would be... actually the military is where I'd start. And oddly it's the place where race based affirmative action is still permitted (military academies - where it benefits minorities) and in its halls (where I've heard that it has a strong white supremacist bent). The reason is because what is happening in colleges is more reactionary -- fix the catalyst and the arguments for the reaction largely go away.
The very real downside is if you just provide equal opportunity then you would still end up with an all white/East Asian/Indian class. You can argue that this is fair and meritocratic and you would be right but I believe there are a lot of people that see value in affirmative action that makes classrooms look more like the racial distribution of the country and provides an easy step up for traditionally poor/downtrodden communities to improve themselves. Affirmative action isn’t only an American thing btw, it’s in China, South Korea, India etc. as well.
You should probably take a look at the demographics of the top scores of the standardized tests like the SAT. You're not going to find the race you think at the top.
Rather than have me guess about what you know, would you care to explain what you meant by your original comment then? What exactly were you referring to as "racist"?
The decision wasn't specifically to drop a standard bar. It was to drop the existing bars because they have become heavily gamed and are far more reliable indicators of your family's resources than your ability or likelihood of success. That was the equity argument.
Unfortunately, the lost signal wasn't replaced with anything. (I don't know what could replace it. It's an incredibly hard problem. )
Easily gamed? Sure, education is pay to win on some level but we're talking basic prerequisites here. If the objection is that disadvantaged would-be students are being filtered out then start an outreach program to help them prep or something.
Irrelevant to his ability to run a company that makes good rockets at an efficient price, so... who cares? This is exactly the point of the person you're replying to.
The ad hominem destroys your ability to recognise how insanely good SpaceX and Elon are at this rocket ship thing.
Actual Nazis made a lot of stuff 75 years ago that you use and take advantage of on a daily basis. Nobody's judging you, dude. Appreciating and recognising a good scientist or businessman doesn't necessitate that you align with them ideologically.
But "running the company" also involved claiming a sniper agent may have been to blame.
I think it's apropos then to consider that this is the same guy who called someone who rescued children stuck in a cave a "pedo". This is a guy who has made some unfortunate public statements.
It's important to remember that actually reporting news is a tertiary purpose of the news business. The primary purpose is to sell advertising. The secondary purpose is to get eyeballs onto their product, in order to facilitate the primary purpose. Reporting news is only done because it's how they've chosen to get those eyeballs.
These "secrets" that are being hidden are basically on the same level as gary tan's list of super uber powerful prompts.
None of it is actually that crazy that everyone else could think up.
What I've noticed in my own experience here is that even when I do share my own prompts/skills few people use them (or alternatively they were so basic that everyone already had their own version).
e.g. If someone doesn't care about xyz before AI, they probably won't after AI even if I serve them it on a silver platter.
Sure we could use our brain power with old techniques to do these, but why? I don't want to do any of these. I'd rather use that brain power for other problems.
Same with maps.
I don't want to have to store a bunch of location or routing data in my head.
I think what you're pointing towards is going from having problems to solve to not having any problems to solve.
That's definitely a danger, but right now is still early in the AI era so obviously it'll feel like we went from solving problems to letting the new tool solve them for us.
There are still many problems to solve.