Mine for AI in general is "chess does not need to be played."
@barquq Or the 40 year ago version.
Just the classroom clips from Real Genius (1985).
@barquq
Yes, absolutely. But on the other hand this is unfortunately not the (only/main) reason to get an education nowadays
https://bsky.app/profile/youngvulgarian.marieleconte.com/post/3lmtnpwcrk22n
so I do absolutely, entirely agree with this but it also does feel like the logical endpoint of treating university as "a thing you have to do for three years otherwise you won't get a job" - if you're not making a case for why a uni education is useful, don't expect people to actually respect it [contains quote post or other embedded content]
@barquq
I get the ask.
If I may ask, didn´t ppl say the same about calculators, programmable calculators and the possibility to hand in essays written on a typewriter or computer instead of by hand?
@littledetritus @barquq Calculators are usually not encouraged while kids are learning arithmetic, nor keyboards when teaching handwriting; the use of an aid should not overshadow the skill being taught.
Even then, keyboards merely accelerate writing, they don't replace the writer's need to think, compose, and write. Calculators can replace the operator for simple tasks, but again: if you're using the tool to replace the learner or teacher, nothing gets learned.
@Oldfartrant @seachaint @littledetritus @barquq I mean, the "Proper" answer depends on the context - for example:
1.) Either a 90 degree move in the opposite direction;
2.) Your calculation used a bad value that ended up applying too much of a given value.
3.) You converted from Radians incorrectly.
@littledetritus @barquq so yes, with every tool there's a part you're no longer learning, and a part you still have to do, which is the tool input.
the question for AI then becomes: what is the part that you are no longer learning, and isn't that precisely what you're going to school to learn?
Especially because unlike a calcluator or a spellchecker, AI doesn't give the student a right answer. How can they ever learn how to tell the AI is wrong?
@barquq Possible source:
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-weekend-essay/why-ai-isnt-going-to-make-art
Without paywall: https://archive.ph/HEYBn
“Using ChatGPT to complete assignments is like bringing a forklift into the weight room”
And it's a broken forklift that can drop a weight on you at any time.
@texttheater @barquq Ted Chiang!! My man!!!
(Non-science-fiction-nerds may be familiar with a little film called "Arrival" based on one of his stories)
I agree. AND, it’s also like using an e-bike for fitness: opens up the activity to a lot of people, and makes it a lot more enjoyable, and you actually do get quite fit and good at riding a bike!
@B3r6ur @barquq Yep, that's a different side of the issue... As long as the education is goal-oriented, using cheats and shortcuts makes too much sense. And if the "cheat engine" is a gross slop machine - you're fighting fire with fire.
Really, we need both to reform the education system and to drive shit like LLMs into the mud.
I really like that.
I found the analogy in this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08NuUbcgT9Q - and on this semi-pseudonymous blog - https://theeffortfuleducator.com/2025/03/18/a-classroom-teachers-take-on-ai/
Neither is as quotable as your version, though.
That's a good one.
@barquq wow.
Using AI to write enterprise software is similar. The purpose of enterprise application programs is to capture knowledge. Using AI specifically defeats that.
(Also true for outsourcing IT support — you donate information about the enterprise to contractors to exploit.)
@econads @barquq I disagree slightly on the priorities. The goal of automating something depends on knowledge capture which depends on understanding.
Since the automation must be auditable and observable, the understanding is primary. Automation doesn’t make the work go away. It shifts the burden from doing to confirming.
@slott56 @barquq
The thing is you're not paid to only learn about the code, you're paid to provide changes to it. No company is going to pay you to read or play with code without making any commits or releases or transferring that knowledge. The learning comes because that's a more efficient way of making changes sustainably.
Anyway, I guess we reached the end of the useful conversation and we're going to start going round in circles, so never mind :-) it was an interesting point you made.
@barquq It's not me (as I'm just a "nobody personal blogger" 😅), but I've used the exact same image! 😊 https://havn.blog/2025/03/01/on-the-need-for-friction.html
"If you’re at the gym, there are many examples of how technology can enhance the effectiveness of our artificial physical exercise. However, using a forklift to lift weights might be more effective and comfortable, compared to doing it yourself – but it also makes the action completely useless!
(1/2)
@barquq The point isn’t _that_ the weights get lifted, but that _you_ do it. This is in contrast with a warehouse, where the point is to get the stuff lifted."
I've used this image in conversations since 2022 (I'm a teacher). Cool to see this is something others has thought about as well!
(2/2)
@barquq Something like that could be said about most work students do in primary and secondary school, from arithmetic exercises to lab experiments to literary analysis. It could cover a lot of post-secondary work too, though at that point your results _might_ be more generally useful.
Using a calculator, fudging measurements, copying homework from others, getting "AI" to do it, or whatever mostly only defeats your education.
There is one caveat. Some people do education for the certifications -- a degree from an accredited university, or something else. If that's your goal, academic dishonesty, including but not limited to the use of "AI" tools, might be the most efficient way to achieve your goal.
@barquq Some sourcing; that quote specifically:
https://bsky.app/profile/samhalpert.bsky.social/post/3lmt3coqvqk2w
an earlier, but slightly less pithy version:
Even accepting the premise that AI produces useful writing (which no one should), using AI in education is like using a forklift at the gym. The weights do not actually need to be moved from place to place. That is not the work. The work is what happens within you.
Even accepting the premise that AI produces useful writing (which no one should), using AI in education is like using a forklift at the gym. The weights do not actually need to be moved from place to place. That is not the work. The work is what happens within you.
Even accepting the premise that AI produces useful writing (which no one should), using AI in education is like using a forklift at the gym. The weights do not actually need to be moved from place to place. That is not the work. The work is what happens within you.
poisonwomb
mint
PhDog
Ozzelot 
Semitones
Brian Campbell
WearyBonnie
Björn ❄️ Starkimarm
Little Detritus
Seachaint 
Alexander The 1st
Doug 🌈🇨🇦 
cuan_knaggs
kakerlakatze - DM to follow!
Souper MKC
Karl Heinz Häsliprinz
Hisham
Steven Heywood
Kilian Evang
Quincy ⁂
neville park
Brian Grinter
A Tattered Scrapbook
Trezzer (aka Helvedeshunden)
🌾 Foxxhoria 🍂
adrien
Gav Maclean
Lisa Gets Politik
D. G. Marshall
Danu
KFears& 🏳️⚧️
Greg Wilson
David McMullin
Nathan Ackroyd
S. Lott
econads
Erlend
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
eswillwalker
Glyph
Getzler Lab at KenyonCollege
Jason Yip
Matteo Bertini 🇮🇹 🌈
John Cleary
In #Flancia we'll meet
Marina Epelman