Skip Navigation
Asklemmy @lemmy.ml
awesome_guy @lemmy.ml

Is it a good idea to let a 16 yrs old use an AI assistant .i.e. chatgpt?

What are pros and cons of doing this? What impact it will have on the personality / mind of the person down the line after say 10 yrs?

34 comments

  • I would go back a few years and ask: Should i let a 16 year old use search engines?

    Probably not too different

    • That’s exactly my perspective.

      I came of age with the birth of the web. I was using systems like Usenet, gopher, wais, and that sort of thing. I was very much into the whole cypherpunk, “information wants to be free” philosophy that thought that the more information people had, the more they could talk to each other, the better the world would be.

      Boy, was I wrong.

      But you can’t put the genie back into the bottle. So now, in addition to having NPR online, we have kids eating tide pods and getting recruited into fascist ideologies. And of course it’s not just kids. It’s tough to see how the anti-vax movement or QAnon could have grown without the internet (which obviously has search engines as a major driver of traffic).

      I think you’re better off teaching critical thinking, and even demonstrating the failings of ChatGPT by showing them how bad it is at answering questions. There’s plenty of resources you can find that should give you a starting point. Ironically, you can find them using a search engine.

      • I think that's a good take on things.

        Ultimately it still holds true. Information does want to be free. You just can't mix that with misinformation, have everything on the same level and a general audience completely oblivious to the fact and uneducated.

        Things have changed. Back in those times it was a small elite on the internet. People who could afford computers and an internet connection and make some use out of it. You needed some amount of intelligence because you had to put some effort in to get online, learn about the tools because that wasn't easy or provided to you. So you'd generally be at least somewhat intelligent if you ended up on the internet. And that's beneficial when it comes to receiving unfiltered information. Combined with the fact that there were comparatively more academics and students, because that was the origin of the internet.

        And it wasn't that common to push your agenda there or advertise for your skewed political views in the way people do it nowadays. Due to the nature of the internet and the amount of people there, it wasn't worth the effort. You'd be better off focusing somewhere else where you could influence more people. So the dynamics were just different due to history and circumstances.

        Things have changed. Nowadays everyone is online all the time. It's the place to influence people and make money. And that's the other part of the problem. The actual people, connecting them and providing information to them (or to each other) isn't what's most of the internet is about, anymore. Motivations are gathering data about people and selling them, making people become addicted to your platform so they spend more time there and you can make more money. Everyone is competing for attention. And bad, emotional stories are what works best. Giving people the "simple truths" they seek instead of an intellectual and nuanced view. Factuality just gets in the way of all of that.

        I sometimes like to compare that to the Age of Reason / Enlightenment. Back then it was monarchs, bad dynamics and missing education. Now it's big tech companies, bad dynamics and insufficient education. People need to get emancipated, educated and leave the current "immature state of ignorance" (to quote Kant.)

        Information and education are key. And the internet, algorithms and AI are just tools. They can be used for progress, or to enslave us. At least the internet has the potential (and was build) to connect people and provide a level playing field to everyone. But it can be used for a variety of different things. And choosing the right things isn't something that can be solved by technology alone.

  • The context of the word "let" is interesting here.

    I would recommend a collaborative approach, it's not as if they can't use it because you tell them no. They don't need a credit card or a driver's license or even a computer.

  • To use as a tool? Yes.
    To use as a friend? No.

    A person using a tool for a longer time will become better in using said tool.

  • Well, lets take a look at how the 16-year-olds who got to use ChatGPT ten years ago have turned out...

    In seriousness, as others have been pointing out, the big online AI assistants are all super neutered these days. I think it's probably fine, and indeed given how these tools are going to likely become more widespread in the future I think it's a good idea for kids to get used to using them. At 16 I'd say they're too old to sit them down and give them a lecture about "it's not really aware, it doesn't feel emotions or have memories, and if you go to it with any sort of medical questions definitely double-check those with another source" - lectures at that age are probably going to backfire from what I've seen. Instead, suggest that they research those things themselves. Just put those questions out there and hopefully it'll motivate them to be curious.

  • ChatGPT is overly safe in terms of personality and the worldview it presents when asked. it's a great tool to learn, more so than a teacher because you can freely ask it very specific questions in your own words and it will give an understandable answer. I think it's actually a perfect tool for someone that age. Once the topics get too advanced, the results become less reliable though.

    It doesnt make things up anymore as much as it used to. It still does sometimes with topics that are less commonly discussed in the dataset it's trained on (this is similar with websearch). It will however confidently claim that it's answer is correct sometimes. As long as you understand that it's not always correct and have the sense to verify things that seem off, you'll be fine.

    You'll get the best results from the paid GPT4 subscription (20 dollars a month), which i would recommend.

    The only real risk i see is overreliance on it. I notice this in myself too, it's almost like i forgot googling things is an option, so when i'm stuck rather than trying another approaxh, i just keep throwing prompts at GPT-4 until i give up and find the solution elsewhere, often within minutes. The way things are going, classic web search is becoming obsolete (unreliable result because of AI written content and fake news) while AI actively tries to be unbiased.

    tldr: Yes, it's extremely useful, make sure they don't forget how to do things without chatgpt too.

  • Like any other automated tool, I'd want them to master the manual skills first.

    With math and calculators first we show we can do it longhand then get the calc. Show you can search and assess sources first then incorporate AI.

34 comments