this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2026
492 points (93.2% liked)

Technology

88677 readers
3181 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 27 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (4 children)

A lot of pro AI people like to compare LLMs to calculators but it’s not comparable at all unless the math you’re doing is simple arithmetic. If you’re doing calculus, the skill you’re working on isn’t arithmetic, so the calculator isn’t much of a factor. Lots of people forget how to do long division after using calculators on the other hand.

Losing skills you had because of help? That shouldn't happen.

That’s exactly what should happen. Cognitive thinking skills are use it or lose it. If you use an LLM to replace your brain, your brain will get worse.

[–] OctopusNemeses@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago

Tech evangelists rely heavily on logical fallacies. False equivalence is one of the main ones. "A thing happened before therefore this tech is nothing to worry about". They're redirecting the argument to bait people to try to prove why calculators are bad. But of course the past already happened and nobody is going prove otherwise.

[–] Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Yep, especially in mathematics a calculator is not much of a help in calculus. The moment you put numbers in whatever thing you wanna solve is the point where the hard part is already done.

[–] Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Speak for yourself lol. I failed calculus the first time because my algebra skills were shit and it had nothing to do with calculus

[–] Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 3 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

That's an issue with your teacher putting the focus on the wrong part. Sorry you had to experience that. My math skills (which were mediocre at best at the time i left school) skyrocketed the moment i got a teacher that made sure we understood the calculus part and didn't even want us to insert real numbers.

[–] leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 hours ago

I hate that I never had a good math teacher and that the ones I had made me hate maths.

I would love to like maths, but there's too much trauma there.

I've taught myself what I've needed for work, but it has never been a pleasant experience.

Bad math teachers are a plague on humanity.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

but it’s not comparable at all unless the math you’re doing is simple arithmetic.

That's what they were studying on the math side

For the first experiment with 354 participants, one group was tasked with solving 15 basic fraction problems

Also

If you’re doing calculus, the skill you’re working on isn’t arithmetic, so the calculator isn’t much of a factor.

Calculators would be a big factor in solving calculus problems. Haven't done calculus in a while but if I recall correctly you are breaking down or rearranging the problem into smaller steps that are more basic arithmetic. One part of a calculus problem could be finding out what the square root of 7 is , if you have a calculator to do that you're more likely to solve the problem more accurately and to not give up on the problem, which were the two metrics this study was looking at.

[–] TheTetrapod@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

Realistically, you would just write root 7 as a coefficient of your answer if you're performing this math long hand. No one really expects anyone to be able to calculate things like that.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io -1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Over time yes, but this says skills were lost during a single session or short term. It was a random group of people, so unknown on what skills they did have before. I think what they observed wasn't a permanent loss, but a placebo effect of having extra help and it was taken away, so for the rest of the test they felt lacking.

My example of calculators was implying one that could do the test work. All calculators have trig functions, and some have calculus abilities. Would a student forget how to find cosine if the calculator was taken away, or do a derivative of a function? Not in one test. But if they were using it first half and then had to do it themselves for the rest, I imagine there's some psychological stuff going on that makes you feel like you've lost that skill.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

They were tested on fractions

Did you use an LLM to summarize the study for you or something?

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io -1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

And reading comprehension.

We're discussing the effects of the test, not what the test was.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 6 points 12 hours ago

The content of the test is relevant to the outcome