AI Makes You Boring
This post argues that AI offloads original thinking, leading to shallow ideas and making people, and their creations, boring. Hacker News weighs in, debating whether AI is the cause of creative dullness or simply an amplifier for existing mediocrity. The conversation probes the complex relationship between AI as a powerful tool and its potential to erode the depth of human thought and engagement.
The Lowdown
The author contends that the widespread use of AI is diminishing human originality, arguing that it fosters a culture of shallow thinking in creative fields like programming and writing. This perspective stems from observations on platforms like 'Show HN,' where AI-assisted projects often lack the depth and conversational richness of their predecessors.
- AI models are inherently bad at original thought; consequently, offloading thinking to LLMs results in unoriginal output, regardless of how insightful the AI deems the user's initial prompt.
- Genuine original ideas are cultivated through prolonged, deep immersion in a problem, a critical process that is bypassed when LLMs perform the cognitive heavy lifting.
- The act of articulating thoughts, such as writing an essay or teaching, is vital for refining ideas, yet this profound engagement is replaced by the superficiality of AI prompting.
- A key analogy is drawn: just as using an excavator to lift weights doesn't build muscle, relying on a GPU to 'think' fails to produce truly interesting or innovative thoughts.
Ultimately, the piece posits that leaning on AI for intellectual tasks prevents the development of authentic insight and creativity, leading to a bland and uninspired intellectual landscape across various domains.
The Gossip
Creative Crisis & Causal Conundrums
Many commenters resonate with the author's view that AI-generated content often lacks originality and depth, leading to a decline in quality across creative and technical outputs. The core debate, however, quickly pivots to causation: Is AI actively *making* people boring, or is it simply enabling already-shallow individuals to produce more content more easily? Some argue AI enables 'idea guys' without the 'hazing ritual' of deep technical competence, while others suggest AI helps average writers produce better text, even if it doesn't make them better writers themselves.
Depth Diminution & Learning Loss
A significant portion of the discussion focuses on the impact of AI on learning and problem-solving. Commenters highlight that the 'struggle' of deep engagement with a problem, whether coding or writing, is crucial for discovery and gaining in-depth understanding. By offloading complex tasks to AI, users miss out on these valuable learning experiences, resulting in a superficial grasp of the subject matter. This leads to a lack of genuine discussion because the creator hasn't truly 'thought about a problem for way longer.' However, a counter-perspective suggests AI can free up time to think creatively about other aspects of work.
Tooling Tactics & Thoughtful Tweaks
While many acknowledge the pitfalls of over-reliance on AI, there's broad consensus that AI can be a valuable tool when used strategically. Commenters describe using LLMs to overcome writer's block, structure thoughts, get boiler-plate code, or even as a 'rubber duck' for brainstorming. The key, they argue, is not to let AI do the thinking entirely, but to use it as a scaffold or an editor, then critically review and rewrite the output in one's own voice and with personal depth. This approach leverages AI's efficiency without sacrificing originality or depth, allowing users to move past 'plausible but incomplete' first drafts.
Perspectives & Potentials
Several commenters critique the author's broad statements, suggesting the article dismisses AI's potential benefits too readily or presents an overly pessimistic view. They argue that AI can serve as a valuable 'conversation partner,' helping individuals, especially those who might consider themselves 'boring,' to explore more interesting ideas or achieve self-actualization. Some also challenge the notion that 'original thinking' is as common as implied, suggesting that most ideas are unoriginal and AI can actually help identify and refine them. The discussion also touches on whether perceived 'gatekeeping' by skilled practitioners is a barrier or a necessary standard.