[HN Gopher] Building a Knowledge System That Enhances Rather Tha...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Building a Knowledge System That Enhances Rather Than Replaces
       Thought
        
       Author : nsavage
       Score  : 43 points
       Date   : 2025-01-02 18:47 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (nsavage.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (nsavage.substack.com)
        
       | uludag wrote:
       | This article touches on a tension I've been feeling too with the
       | rise of LLMs. I feel that analogies can be drawn to time
       | management and systems of productivity, like GTD. Like in a GTD
       | system, you almost need the various projects, tasks, next steps,
       | deadlines, commitments, etc. to live in your head so you can make
       | intuitive decisions about what you should be working on at the
       | moment; something that AI almost by definition can't do, since
       | your subjectivity is essential in this process, but in certain
       | ways may be able to assist.
        
         | treetalker wrote:
         | I've been sensing this too: people seem to forget about the
         | principal and beneficial internal effect on the mind that
         | results from mental exertion. I raised a similar point in
         | another HN post today and someone downvoted me because they
         | interpreted my statement as being too anti-LLM!
         | 
         | We're reliving Socrates's lament about writing.
        
       | Terr_ wrote:
       | > From Socrates worrying that writing would destroy memory [...]
       | Think of it as a partnership: the computer handles the
       | organizational heavy lifting, while you focus on the thinking.
       | 
       | I'm less worried about memory _per se_ and more about failing to
       | think, or getting brainwashed /ring-led by a system with its own
       | biases and quirks. Any sufficiently complex organizing _is_
       | thinking!
       | 
       | Perhaps the simplest example is when quantities (numbers, easy to
       | record) get a mental weight that overshadows and hides their
       | dimensions (the definitions, what they really mean.) For example,
       | a tendency to automatically assume a rising GDP number is an
       | unqualified good sign.
       | 
       | Stuff like LLMs bring that into newer and more-dangerous
       | territory, because the model also contains uncountable subtle
       | biases from its training data, and even if you _know_ it isn 't
       | aligned (heh) with your own mental models you can't reliably
       | change it. Much like false-memories implanted by interrogators,
       | patterns in those systems can and will leak into the users.
       | Whenever we can't "think about how our thinking is being
       | changed", I'd say that's _axiomatically bad_.
        
         | Terr_ wrote:
         | P.S.: Lest anyone think I'm a Luddite--not that I think that
         | appellation is actually that bad--an example where I _would_
         | use an LLM would be to help me generate synonyms or alternate
         | inputs to a more-traditional search for a discrete external
         | piece of information.
         | 
         | For example, I might remember a book with a jester playing a
         | lute and singing about ogres, and I just can't find any clear
         | search results, because it was actually a bard strumming a harp
         | with a poem about giants.
         | 
         | This is much less dangerous than just throwing every dang thing
         | into LLM inputs (since prompt injection isn't a fluke, it's a
         | way of life) or filtering the results back through the same
         | model in an opaque fashion.
        
       | vouaobrasil wrote:
       | > What parts of note-taking should we digitize? What aspects
       | should remain firmly in human hands? And most importantly, how do
       | I create a tool that enhances rather than replaces human thought?
       | 
       | My personal philosophy is to use the most primitive methods
       | possible and only use technology when there really is a strong
       | need to go to the next level. It exposes what I really need, what
       | are the weaknesses, etc. For example, I take all my notes with
       | pen and paper. But if I find that I'm really referring back to
       | something, I might write it up in a document. I don't see the
       | point in digitizing everything right away if I'm never going to
       | use what I write.
       | 
       | Moreover, writing things first by hand helps me remember them
       | better and "feel" the knowledge through my hands.
       | 
       | Same thing with photography. I don't tend to use the burst mode
       | on my camera unless I REALLY need it. When it comes to
       | accomplishing things, I found (personally) that asceticism with
       | tools is best.
        
         | RaftPeople wrote:
         | > _Moreover, writing things first by hand helps me remember
         | them better and "feel" the knowledge through my hands._
         | 
         | There was a science article recently that studied taking notes
         | and it's results were that handwritten notes improved recall
         | compared to typed notes.
        
       | Kalq wrote:
       | With regards to zettelkasten, I've always worndered where
       | serendipitous discovery of notes goes from being actually
       | worthwhile to frequently getting distracted but justifying it as
       | productive.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-02 23:00 UTC)