GenZ_RiseUp
That's not necessarily a negative, a lot of entertainment has been predicated on non-thought (Seinfeld was great in part because of no hugs, no learning) consumption. However, when it leaks into how we access and shape the world, there is an increase in 'slop'pily made, low quality structures and products. I feel like its ushering in an era of 'Chabuduo' [1] across the globe that's going to be very difficult to come out of.
[1] https://www.chinaexpatsociety.com/culture/the-chabuduo-minds...
While they should not be read for prescriptive purposes, they can be a font of connections to draw from if one is in the knowledge business. People like fables, stories, patterns leading to success, etc.
Good book recommendations at he end though - dry, but supplementary (also shouldn't be prescriptive!). Experience trumps all.
I was indeed guilty of using it for one assignment wholesale, and a sizable portion of my final practicum. However, in the article it mentions something lightly that teachers use to distinguish LLM work from human work, which also rubbed me the wrong way.
The arguments and counterarguments were given equal weighting, unless a command were to be given to the LLM to spit out partiality to one, whereby it is overwhelming in substance (if not in language) towards that thesis. Now, finalizing my grad school time, I've not used it, and have actively discouraged group members from using it, as I feel there is an advantage in searching painstakingly for new, obscure ideas - where LLMs tend to give the same advice for recommendations to anyone who sets them the same problem. I used to do the same thing with Bing, in lieu of Google search, for more 'quirky' ideas to implement in my arguments.
There, I believe, lies an advantage for the semi-industrious knowledge student. Travel not the beaten path, but the one that takes slightly more effort for proportionally greater rewards.