I could feel myself heading down this road, and have a family member doing the same. For that reason I deleted my entire history in Claude and ChatGPT. That "leaning more heavily on AI tools to help them keep up" deeply concerns me...I never want to be a human who is dependent on a machine to tell me how to be human/live/work/be in relationships which is what I see happening from some of the people you describe here
I think the challenge with studying this at this particular moment in time is that you have an incredible degree of selection bias.
Your initial quote from Nat Eliason specified ambitious people, and I think that’s largely what any study will see. The power users of AI right now are ambitious early adopters who are excited about the technology.
I’m one of them, and I’m definitely doing more with AI instead of touching grass, but that’s because using it is the most fun I’ve ever had while doing productive work.
Ye…es - who’s measuring the net ‘productivity’, tho, and the actual costs (societal, energy, opportunity ) of your fun? This time around (I got a bit overexcited after upping the memory of my fancy Commidore PET from 4K to 32k, but the consequences were more limited at the time.
So... what is actually being produced by all this extra work? I see a lot of people saying the same thing - that they feel "addicted" to the product and they're getting "so much done". But whenever I ask what they are actually *doing*, the answer is something like "I'm coding! I'm getting so much more code written!" And like... to do *what*?
I could feel myself heading down this road, and have a family member doing the same. For that reason I deleted my entire history in Claude and ChatGPT. That "leaning more heavily on AI tools to help them keep up" deeply concerns me...I never want to be a human who is dependent on a machine to tell me how to be human/live/work/be in relationships which is what I see happening from some of the people you describe here
I think the challenge with studying this at this particular moment in time is that you have an incredible degree of selection bias.
Your initial quote from Nat Eliason specified ambitious people, and I think that’s largely what any study will see. The power users of AI right now are ambitious early adopters who are excited about the technology.
I’m one of them, and I’m definitely doing more with AI instead of touching grass, but that’s because using it is the most fun I’ve ever had while doing productive work.
Ye…es - who’s measuring the net ‘productivity’, tho, and the actual costs (societal, energy, opportunity ) of your fun? This time around (I got a bit overexcited after upping the memory of my fancy Commidore PET from 4K to 32k, but the consequences were more limited at the time.
So... what is actually being produced by all this extra work? I see a lot of people saying the same thing - that they feel "addicted" to the product and they're getting "so much done". But whenever I ask what they are actually *doing*, the answer is something like "I'm coding! I'm getting so much more code written!" And like... to do *what*?