To quote me: "That's what happens when you go listen to philosophers. You get ideas. Wrong ones."

I spent a lot of time with academic philosophers and have found precisely fuck all insight.

The best philosophic ideas I’ve read come from programmers and builders. I don’t know why that connection exists. My hunch is that programming and philosophy both deal in the abstract so are inherently connected somehow.

> I don’t know why that connection exists

It doesn’t. The meaningful connection is between other programmers and you. Same reason some people like sports metaphors. The medium is the message.

Philosophy deals with things that sound good but don’t work in reality. So does programming. I think that’s where the inherent connection is.

I was going to put a facetious comment about Marx’s grave and my contribution to philosophy but I’ll leave that for another post.

...why even bother with essays at all then. This is some kind of insane "they pretend to pay us, we pretend to work" setup that benefits nobody.

Students shouldn’t be turning in essays. They should turn in the chat history with an LLM. We need to go beyond just putting your own thoughts into words but instead guiding students on how to explore and hone their own thoughts with AI.

If they come up with metprocesses to game this, that’s a win.

The situation is that school want to teach people to write, a difficult skill. But the problem is being a bureaucracy schools actually operate by "turn in two shitty half-assed essays every semester and eventually we hope you'll learn".

And now chatGpt can duplicate that and there's no real skill involved in getting it to do that and neither do they "explore and hone their own thoughts" in this process, mostly you can just an assignment to ChatGpt.

I feel like we should be doing again an analysis from first principles, determining the purpose behind having students learn X, and determine how useful it is given today's context. If AI can do X well enough, then students should really be taught how to use it to do X for them. Or perhaps there isn't even a need for X at all anymore; just a nice-to-know.

They'd just ask ChatGPT to invent a suitably profound prompt history, and that's it?

> benefits nobody

That would be the point. Why bother at all?

Because brain development happens under external stress, and absent that people stay dumb.

Source?

> "they pretend to pay us, we pretend to work" setup that benefits nobody

It benefits the existing social structures, so they don't actually have to change with the times but can remain in a half-assed patched state that barely holds on because nobody wants to deal with the full rewrite.

It's a process. Maybe it'll stick as a ritual.

I can't believe people think this guy is anything other than utterly full of shit and a fraud.

That quote is totally moronic as usual.

I would even say I don't want to read anything by anyone who thinks Zizek has anything interesting to say. Instant block or else I may become infected by the stupidity.