this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2025
46 points (89.7% liked)
Technology
72414 readers
3407 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It definitely does in my experience. I have intentionally used it for specific tasks for defined periods of time. And then stopped and used only my normal online search tools and a text editor without AI assistance. My projects were written concept development, plus some light coding to create utility scripts.
From just my own experience there is definitely a real cognitive hazard associated with using LLMs at all, for all but the most specialized tasks where an LLM is really warranted.
The scripts worked fine, as they were quite simple python utilities for some data cleaning, so I see a use there. But I found that the concepts never caught fire in my imagination, whereas usually a good share of concepts developed manually turn into something that gets a deeper treatment, even a prototype design at least.
I find myself thinking harder and learning more when I use AI. I'm constantly thinking what I can do to double check it. I constantly look at what it writes and consider whether it did the task I asked it to do or the task I need done.
I'm on track to rewrite 25000 lines of code from one testing framework to another in 3 days, and I started out not knowing either framework and not having really written in typescript in years. And I'm pretty sure I can write the tests from scratch in my primary project that is just getting started.
This one anecdote doesn't disprove a study, of course, but it seems to me that the findings are not universally true for some reason. Whether it's a matter of technique or brain chemistry, I don't know. Ideally, people could be taught to use AI to improve their thinking rather than supplant it.
But do you also sometimes leave out AI for steps the AI often does for you, like the conceptualisation or the implementation? Would it be possible for you to do these steps as efficiently as before the use of AI? Would you be able to spot the mistakes the AI makes in these steps, even months or years along those lines?
The main issue I have with AI being used in tasks is that it deprives you from using logic by applying it to real life scenarios, the thing we excel at. It would be better to use AI in the opposite direction you are currently use it as: develop methods to view the works critically. After all, if there is one thing a lot of people are bad at, it's thorough critical thinking. We just suck at knowing of all edge cases and how we test for them.
Let the AI come up with unit tests, let it be the one that questions your work, in order to get a better perspective on it.