How many studies do researchers need to do before the threat of LLMs is taken seriously? This technology *might* have some useful niche applications, but widespread deployment will be a disaster for humanity.

This shit is an existential hazard, and not in the way the AI companies love to talk about. It's not going to take over the world like Skynet, it's a cognitohazard that turns anyone that interacts with it into an idiot.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-algorithmic-mind/202603/adults-lose-skills-to-ai-children-never-build-them

Adults Lose Skills to AI. Children Never Build Them.

Discussions of cognitive offloading often miss a critical distinction: What AI does to a 45-year-old's brain is categorically different from what it does to a 14-year-old's.

Psychology Today
Thinking about LLM-based "AI" chatbots as cognitohazards is apt. They are deceptive and subversive in an extremely subtle but systematic way. They warp your perception and cognition to make you _feel_ as if you're more capable while simultaneously degrading your skills.
These chatbots are like an amulet cursed by dark magic. It grants the wearer an apparent intelligence boost, at the cost of stealing their soul over time and binding them to the object. After extensive use, taking the amulet off incapacitates the person. They can't live without it.

I should stop talking about AI. Like so many other social issues, I'm only preaching to the converted. All it does is remind people of Yet Another Bad Thing You Have No Power To Change.

Or to put it a different way, whatever levers you have available to influence the situation are probably already being pushed. Me reminding you doesn't do anything other than make you feel worse.

@malcircuit this is partially true but also, if it makes you feel better to write about it and analyze it, then you should continue and people can ignore or block as needed. There's nothing wrong with preaching to the choir.