[HN Gopher] Keep the Robots Out of the Gym
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Keep the Robots Out of the Gym
        
       Author : Group_B
       Score  : 21 points
       Date   : 2025-12-28 21:58 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (danielmiessler.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (danielmiessler.com)
        
       | turtleyacht wrote:
       | If gym is a mindset, hard to separate from the other.
        
         | danielrm26 wrote:
         | I think that comes down to documenting the mindset as a goal
         | and then using all the AI, scaffolding, and tools available to
         | that system to help you nurture that mindset.
        
       | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
       | > [AI/LLM writes] why I made the decisions I did
       | 
       | When one thinks about human decision making, there are at least
       | two classes of decisions:
       | 
       | 1. decisions made with our "fast" minds: ducking out of the way
       | of an incoming object, turning around when someone calls our name
       | ... a whole host of decisions made without much if any conscious
       | attention, and that _if you asked the human who made those
       | decisions_ you wouldn 't get much useful information about.
       | 
       | 2. decisions made with our "slow" minds: deciding which of 3
       | gifts to get for Aunt Mary, choosing to give a hug to our cousin,
       | deciding to double the chile in the recipe we're cooking ... a
       | whole host of decisions that require conscious reasoning, and if
       | you asked the human who made those decisions _you would get a
       | reasonably coherent, explanatory logic chain_.
       | 
       | When considering why an LLM "made the decisions that it did", it
       | seems important to understand whether those decisions are closer
       | to type 1 or type 2. If the LLM arrived at them the way we arrive
       | at a type 1 decision, it is not clear that an explanation of why
       | is of much value. If an LLM arrived at them the way we arrive at
       | a type 2 decision, the explanation might be fairly interesting
       | and valuable.
        
       | arm32 wrote:
       | You're really rizzing up the whole "AI can do almost everything
       | better than humans" point. Is there a chance that your
       | investments are causing you to sensationalize things a bit?
       | Because I can promise you, AI can only do better the things that
       | I have absolutely no skill in.
        
       | davnicwil wrote:
       | It's an interesting one. We'll have to discover where to draw
       | that line in education and training.
       | 
       | It is an incredible accelerant in top-down 'theory driven'
       | learning, which is objectively good, I think we can all agree.
       | Like, it's a better world having that than not having it. But at
       | the same time there's a tension between that and the sort of
       | bottom-up practice-driven learning that's pretty inarguably
       | required for mastery.
       | 
       | Perhaps the answer is as mundane as one must simply do both, and
       | failing to do both will just result in... failure to learn
       | properly. Kind of as it is today except today there's often no
       | truly accessible / convenient top-down option _at all_ therefore
       | it 's not a question anyone thinks about.
        
         | danielrm26 wrote:
         | OP here, yeah, I think that's a really good point.
         | 
         | I feel like the way I'm building this in is a violent
         | maintenance of two extremes.
         | 
         | On one hand, fully merged with AI and acting like we are one
         | being, having it do tons of work for me.
         | 
         | And then on the other hand is like this analog gym where I'm
         | stripped of all my augmentations and tools and connectivity,
         | and I am being quizzed on how good I could do just by myself.
         | 
         | And based on how well I can do in the NAUG scenario, that's
         | what determines what tweaks need to be made to regular AUG
         | workflows to improve my NAUG performance.
         | 
         | Especially for those core identity things that I really care
         | about. Like critical thinking, creating and countering
         | arguments, identifying my own bias, etc.
         | 
         | I think as the tech gets better and better, we'll eventually
         | have an assistant whose job is to make sure that our un-
         | augmented performance is improving, vs. deteriorating. But
         | until then, we have to find a way to work this into the system
         | ourselves.
        
           | davnicwil wrote:
           | there could also be an almost chaos-monkey-like approach of
           | cutting off the assistance at indeterminate intervals, so
           | you've got to maintain a baseline of skill / muscle memory to
           | be able to deal with this.
           | 
           | I'm not sure if people would subject themselves to this, but
           | perhaps the market will just serve it to us as it currently
           | does with internet and services sometimes going down :-)
           | 
           | I know for me when this happens, and also when I sometimes do
           | a bit of offline coding in various situations, it feels good
           | to exercise that skill of just writing code from scratch
           | (erm, well, with intellisense) and kind of re-assert that I
           | can do it now we're in tab-autocomplete land most of the
           | time.
           | 
           | But I guess opting into such a scheme would be one-to-one
           | with the type of self determined discipline required to learn
           | anything in the first place anyway, so I could see it
           | happening for those with at least equal motivation to learn X
           | as exist today.
        
         | xboxnolifes wrote:
         | How I see it, LLMs aren't really not much different than
         | existing information sources. I can watch video tutorials and
         | lectures all day, but if I don't sit down and practice applying
         | what I see, very little of it will stick long term.
         | 
         | The biggest difference I see is, pre-LLM search, I spent a lot
         | more time looking for a good source for what I was looking for,
         | and I probably picked up some information along the way.
        
       | llmslave2 wrote:
       | We want machines to do the laundry and clean our house so we have
       | more time to create art and write code. Seems like in our current
       | trajectory, the machines will produce the art and code so we have
       | more time to clean our house and do laundry....
        
         | danielrm26 wrote:
         | Ah man...that's good.
         | 
         | But maybe both of those are in the category of undesirable
         | things.
         | 
         | And the things we end up with are like art and baking and
         | walking and talking and drinking coffee and such.
         | 
         | Professional Chess is a nice pattern here. A calculator can
         | beat Magnus Carlsen at this point, but Chess is more popular
         | than ever. So it should be ok if AI/Robots are better than us
         | at all the stuff we still decide to do.
        
         | ares623 wrote:
         | Maybe cleaning house and doing laundry needs to start being
         | marketed as an art form /s
        
       | ab227 wrote:
       | This is a great framework for self-development, but I wonder if
       | the Job vs. Gym analogy is a bit premature. There seems to be a
       | level of Silicon Valley optimism here that assumes AI already
       | surpasses human capability in these creative areas. From my
       | perspective, AI only outperforms in areas where the human hasn't
       | developed a real craft. Is it possible that the current hype is
       | causing us to undervalue the unique quality of human-only output?
        
       | dnautics wrote:
       | - using ai effectively is itself a skill that needs training,
       | especially if you're already good at the critical thinking stuff.
       | 
       | - using AI actually most of everything i do anyways, _is_
       | critical thinking. I 'm constantly reviewing the AI's code and
       | finding little places where the AI tried to get away with a
       | shortcut, or started to overarchitect a solution, or both.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-28 23:00 UTC)