36
using an AI chatbot is "dabbling in computer science" in the same way that playing Operation in your dorm common room is "dabbling in med school"
I played Doctor totally wrong in the dorms, it seems.
AI enables the hubris that you can be an expert in any field. I use it daily, it gives you just enough info and knowledge that you feel that, right before it makes a huge fucking mistake.
That's all this is, these people gain the arrogance that they can simply pick up another field. Same as management and executives. Anyone working with AI daily knows that's all it is.
Does it help? Sure. In the hands of a capable engineer who knows what the hell it's doing. In the hands of some entry-level or non tech person? Horrifying results and pure arrogance.
That dovetails nicely with the mental state of an undergrad. In my case, I did actually know everything back then.
AI is helping me stand out
I refer to the six essays (might have been 5) I received in a class on critical perspectives on disasters. I used a contract grading scheme, so no actual grades on essays:
"I first heard about critical theory in my sociology class."
All of them opened with some version of that. Burned into my sad professor mind.
At least they didn't first hear about it in someone else's sociology class?
Silver lining.
Literally my colleague thinking he is safe because he studied the field that tries to make him obsolote. Lmao buddy you are so fucked. Learn something practical. AI wont be laying cables and pipes any time soon.
So we all become labor workers and let AI companies become richer and richer while we are the slaves and peasants?
Lmao, if you think that piece of garbage can do anything useful in a real environment you are lost. They might get there eventually, but not for a while longer and not in europe.
What's the basis of this statement?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S67z2aekBrI I'm not seeing many experts who don't think this is around the corner and you can really see why in this video where he does the work himself.
I don't see any reason to think this is more than ten years out?
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/11397510 they've really already begun to do useful things
Its about generalization. A robot like this only works in a very controlled environment. Any unforeseen variable will completely stop it in its tracks. To be able to do a trade job it would need to be much more flexible. Good luck building a single machine that can work outdoors, in heat, in snow, in rain, in mud, in a sewer, in a narrow cable or pipe shaft, buy material, analyze problems, drive to its work site, verify results, deal with customers, etc. One human can do all those things and much cheaper and more reliably than any robot or swarm of robots ever could. The real world is messy and complex, not a show room prepped to only include problems the machine can solve.
Yes, it's hard, but we are pouring billions of dollars into this, and have the necessary frameworks. None of that factors in the exponential rate of progress and the vast amount of additional funding going to this project now. It will be difficult, but a chore robot is still on the horizon and once it's done and working in homes, the next step will happen too.
“In the same way that everybody needs some degree of math, reading and writing, I think everybody needs a degree of AI literacy,” he said.
🤮
That quote I strongly agree with, but I think you completely misunderstand what the professor means.
A huge problem in education right now is students using AI inappropriately, in many different ways. As an extension of the "digital literacy skills" education has been focusing on teaching in the last ~1-2 decades, educators are now teaching "AI literacy" skills, because students are using it wrong all the time. And it's unacceptable both academically and professionally.
AI literacy skills are mostly about teaching students how bad AI is, what it can't do, and why they should not rely on it. Like, understanding how an LLM works means that students will understand that they're just fancy word predicting machines, not "intelligent" in any way. Students who understand this are much less likely to trust LLM output.
AI literacy skills are not teaching students how to vibe code faster.
'AI literacy' in the context of 'don't use it to cheat' or 'it may fabricate information or attributions' should be an extension of institutional plagiarism and acceptable source policies; such policies can and should be discussed to ensure students understand them, including the implications of AI.
Framing it as being 'literate' in AI use, however, is a tacit encouragement (or at best acceptance) for such tools to be used.
If everyone had a degree of AI literacy we'd already be out of the AI bubble.
These folks missed the window for getting into computer science. The industry sucks now.
As soon as Claude finishes coming up with a response for you, I'm going to have a retort!
Out of tokens; I'll come back with a response next month.
I might want out actually
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
36 points (97.4% liked)
Technology
43346 readers
213 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS