One study compares what AI does to your ability to think to boiled frog syndrome. The frog does not come out well

There are two things that the technology industry is pushing hard. On the one hand, short videos. The TikTok format ‘broke’ it a few years ago to the point that platforms like Instagram or YouTube jumped headlong into copying them. On the other hand, AI. Everything must have AI, and now a chatbot He must be our assistant at all times. In parallel, every time more studies appear that point to something disturbing. That, perhaps, our brain is eroding. In short. Months ago, a study pointed out that chatbots cause cognitive surrender, another that makes us lazy and there is even one from Microsoft itself pointing in the same direction. One of the last is the elaborated by researchers from MIT, the University of California, Oxford, and Carnegie Mellon titled “AI Assistance Reduces Persistence and Harms Independent Performance.” To test the hypothesis, they conducted three experiments in which they let part of the participants access a bot based on GPT-5 and, after ten minutes, they cut off that access. Before the results, the tests: Equation Test – 350 people had to solve those problems. Qlogic test – 670 people had to take a mathematical test, but of logical reasoning in this case. Reading comprehension test – 200 participants who had to analyze a text and complete a brief reading comprehension series. We are so-so. As we say, part of the sample had access to that bot that was deactivated in the middle of the ‘exam’, and the result was the same in all three tests. As the researchers point out, when access to AI is interrupted, not only does the participants’ performance drop, but also their perseverance. In statements to the magazine Futurismone of the researchers points out that “once we take away the AI, it is not just that they make mistakes when giving the answer, it is that they are not willing to try either.” There was a distinction between AI users: Those who wanted the easy answer were the quickest to lose interest in attempting the task when they no longer had access to the tool. Those who asked for explanations or not to “cheat” directly had better results because some did try to continue with the task. The boiled frog. That’s where the analogy of the boiled frog that applies so well to this situation. The premise is that if we put a frog in a saucepan of boiling water, the frog will jump as soon as it senses danger. However, if we put the frog in the saucepan with warm water and heat it little by little, the animal will cook. This is not the case because the frog is obviously not stupid and, as long as it cannot be thermoregulateit will jump, but the analogy serves to explain what is happening with AI and those who delegate all tasks to a chatbot so as not to have to think. Are they making us dumber? Fools, fools… wouldn’t be the word. Rather, we become lazy. We don’t think because, after all, we have AI to do it for us. Without going into the danger that it poses (because now AIs are free, but tomorrow they may take them away from us at a stroke and turn them into a paid product even for the most basic tasks), the researchers they point out that, if someone uses AI in their daily life for all types of tasks, that person runs the risk of seeing their capabilities erode to the point of creating a dependency on the system because they do not know how to do anything without it. with head. This study, like many others, is not a criticism of artificial intelligence. As we have once said, it is just another tool, but you have to have criteria when using it. As the researchers point out, performance and interest are not the same in the case of someone who uses AI as a quick response as in the case of someone who just wants a concept explained to them. What they are clear about is that their observations, apart from those of other studies, should serve as a basis when designing how to integrate chatbots into educational programs. Because we are already seeing that there are countries and institutions that are integrating AI into classrooms and the conclusion of the study is that the analytical and creative thinking that we develop during youth is vital in adulthood. “Practice makes you better, and that is precisely what AI will take away from you. We will have a generation of students and people who will not know what they are capable of, and then that will hurt both innovation and human creativity” – Rachit Dubey, computational cognitive scientist at the University of California fast food. I commented at the beginning that short videos were also affecting us and it was not a toast to the Sun. It has a lot to do with the use of AI to obtain easy answers because the bottom line is the same: not having to think. It is something related to the concept of “brain rot” and the trap of dopamine, creating that dependency. In the case of short videos with slop and empty content, another implication is that little by little they break our attention span. That is why videos on YouTube The aim is to hook you from the beginningthe songs are getting shorter and have choruses that fit into the 15 seconds of an Instagram story, microdramas are the order of the day and when you start watching a movie that is not releasing dopamine, not even five minutes pass until you pick up your phone. It’s up to us to let the frog stew until it’s cooked… or if it jumps out of the pot. Images | J. Ronald LeeChatGPT (edited) In Xataka | The big names in AI are fighting over neuroscientists like they were soccer stars

This frog is one of the most colorful creatures in the world. Photographic tourism is costing it its existence

The frog you see above is one of the most striking amphibians that exist, so how can you not stop to take a photo of it if you find it in your path? Well, in practice it is difficult for you to come across one if you live in Madrid, London or New York because this frog that looks like it’s from another galaxy is native from a very specific place in India: the evergreen forests of the Western Ghats mountain range, at an altitude of between 900 to 1,200 meters. So if the mountain does not go to Muhammad, Muhammad goes to the mountain: just as there are those who leave to Mexico to swim with wild orcasthere are people who prepare a getaway on their own to immortalize the galaxy frog, which is its name. These unregulated photographic excursions are already taking their toll: an entire group of specimens has disappeared from the rainforest. As you can deduce from the photograph of the galaxy frog, it gets its name from its cosmic appearance, with a black background and little black spots that look like stars. It is not an appearance that goes unnoticed, but between the fact that it is similar in size to the tip of a finger and that they hide in small spaces such as cracks under rocks, fallen leaves and decaying trees, It is not easy to see them with the naked eye.. Going to photograph an endangered species is not the best thing for the species. Handle it carelessly, either And it is not easy to see them simply because they are disappearing from the face of the Earth: galaxy frogs have a conservation status classified as “threatened” that is getting worse, according to this study published in Herpetology Notes.In the paper They point directly to one of the main culprits: uncontrolled photographic outings, insofar as they cause alterations and changes in behavior that have an impact on the feeding and reproduction of the frogs. The study’s research team, led by Rajkumar K. P, a scientist at the Zoological Society of London, has been monitoring that area of ​​​​the jungle since 2019, which has allowed them to follow the population of the Melanobatrachus indicus (its scientific name) over time. Back in 2020 they discovered a group of seven galaxy frogs hidden under some logs. Via: Drjpmenon When they returned to the area after COVID-19, they found that this group had disappeared. So, all the alarms went off: What had happened to that group of frogs? Well, two summers where different groups of photographers came en masse, trampling the area and moving the logs looking for: 1. the frogs. 2. get the perfect composition to take the ideal photo. As the investigation states: “The photographers knew the microhabitat of the species through publications and local trackers and moved numerous logs while searching for the frogs.” The researchers are aware of groups of up to six photographers who came to the place eager to photograph the frogs. And not only that, they often moved the specimens to place them on moss or logs, so that they could take a photo with a more attractive background. For frogs, it not only involves the presence of man or undergoing changes in their location and that of the elements where they hide and find food, but also enduring repeated manipulations and powerful camera flashes to illuminate the scene for hours. Touching such a sensitive wild animal without biosafety protocols is not a good idea: stress, heat, potential illnesses… are some of the conditions they suffered, such as pick up the paper. One of the trackers assured the researchers that two small frogs perished during the sessions, although the scientists could not verify this. The investigation concludes with a series of good practicesa measure that researchers say should be established in the form of ethical standards for nature and conservation photography. This is not a study against natural photography, since as Rajkumar explains, done correctly it can be the best ally: “It’s a huge resource to help conservationists better understand things like animal distribution and behavior, and the resulting images can educate others about these incredible species. (…) However, irresponsible photography can turn that resource into a danger.” Rajkumar takes this sad episode as an example as “a strong warning about the consequences of unregulated photography” but that without careful and responsible management “we run the risk of disappear from the planet forever“. In Xataka | In its fight against mass tourism, Italy has entered uncharted territory: a tax on tourist dogs In Xataka | Ultra-rich tourism has found an oasis in Kenya. A Safari at $3,500 a night that blocks animal migration Cover | Davidvraju

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.