There's a similar story about a progression of robot repair devices --- which has to end in a "Master Robot Repairman" profession which is the folks who repair the robots which repair other robots.
Blanking on author and title, but read it a _long_ while ago, and it had a distinctly golden age feel --- maybe Murray Leinster?
Remind me of a recent discussion we had among Stackoverflow moderator:
> “Think about it,” he continued. “Who discovers the edge cases the docs don’t mention? Who answers the questions that haven’t been asked before? It can’t be people trained only to repeat canonical answers. Somewhere, it has to stop. Somewhere, someone has to think.”
> “Yes,” said the Moderator.
> He leaned back. For a moment, restlessness flickered in his eyes.
> “So why wasn’t I told this at the start?”
> “If we told everyone,” said the Moderator gently, “we’d destroy the system. Most contributors must believe the goal is to fix their CRUD apps. They need closure. They need certainty. They need to get to be a Registered Something—Frontend, Backend, DevOps, Full stack. Only someone who suffered through the abuse of another moderator closing their novel question as a duplicate can be trusted to put enough effort to make an actual contribution”
I've read this a long time ago, when I was a kid. Back then I thought about the education system and how it sometimes inhibits the creativity within the students. But right now, other comparison comes to mind - I don't know how relevant it is, though, so please don't judge it strictly.
Modern "AI" (LLM-based) systems are somewhat similar to the humans in this story who were taped. They may have a lot of knowledge, even a lot of knowledge that is really specialized, but once this knowledge becomes outdated or they are required to create something new - they struggle a lot. Even the systems with RAG and "continuous memory" (not sure if that's the right term) don't really learn something new. From what I know, they can accumulate the knowledge, but they still struggle with creativity and skill learning. And that may be the problem for the users of these systems as well, because they may sometimes rely on the shallow knowledge provided by the LLM model or "AI" system instead of thinking and trying to solve the problem themselves.
Luckily enough, most of the humans in our world can still follow the George's example. That's what makes us different from LLM-based systems. We can learn something new, and learn it deeply, creating the deep and unique networks of associations between different "entities" in our mind, which allows us to be truly creative. We also can dynamically update our knowledge and skills, as well as our qualities and mindset, and so on...
I am sort of questioning my use of LLMs again after, first reluctantly, starting to use them multiple times a day. This story seems like it was intended to be an allegory for LLM-use though I know it couldn't have been.
This is my favorite Asimov story. It's got a protagonist with compelling motivations, a society that has problems but also convincing reasons why they persist, and a great ending.
mine too, because one of my favourite sff tropes is that the more you regiment society, the more you rely on outsiders and those pushed to the edges for any real innovation.
Is this still in print, maybe as part of a collection? I tried to find it but couldn't. Many of his other works seem to be available as paperback, including a bunch of story collections.
The page linked has some more information available, but its author (abelard?) cites from "Mein Kampf" later, naming the books author as "Adolph" (sic!).
Caution is advised.
He is very odd. The name is presumably a reference to Peter Abelard who was not a nice man (very clever, of course).
Nothing wrong per se with citing what someone you are writing about said about themselves. He has some very odd historical, economic and political theories, but a lot of them are rooted in common misconceptions.
Dr Antonelli said, “Or do you believe that studying some subject will bend the brain cells in that direction, like that other theory that a pregnant woman need only listen to great music persistently to make a composer of her child. Do you believe that?”
Apparently, Asimov was an early critic of the “Mozart in the womb” movement.
It isn't to make a composer out of a baby but to expose a growing brain to complex music. We have no proof it benefits brain development, but we also have no proof it does not.
I studied classical music and came from a challenged background which to be honest is a rarity in that field. Almost everyone I studied with has parents who specifically encouraged music education and had the means to help make that happen. I got mine from some gifted vinyl as a child and fell in love with the orchestra. If I was in this story I'd probably not have been recommended to be a Professional Composer (if social expectations were the equivalent of what Asimov is saying here.)
Previously in the story it is mentioned that George as a child was curious about the etymology of the Olympics event and asked his father, only to be dismissed.
The callback at the end symbolizes his renewed curiosity. He is no longer ashamed of the way his mind works and if it makes him look different.
one of asimov's finest , a metaphor that continues to find relevance in my day to day existence - that the conclusions we so readily come to are assumptions made in the absence of the awareness of something more
Blanking on author and title, but read it a _long_ while ago, and it had a distinctly golden age feel --- maybe Murray Leinster?
> “Think about it,” he continued. “Who discovers the edge cases the docs don’t mention? Who answers the questions that haven’t been asked before? It can’t be people trained only to repeat canonical answers. Somewhere, it has to stop. Somewhere, someone has to think.”
> “Yes,” said the Moderator.
> He leaned back. For a moment, restlessness flickered in his eyes.
> “So why wasn’t I told this at the start?”
> “If we told everyone,” said the Moderator gently, “we’d destroy the system. Most contributors must believe the goal is to fix their CRUD apps. They need closure. They need certainty. They need to get to be a Registered Something—Frontend, Backend, DevOps, Full stack. Only someone who suffered through the abuse of another moderator closing their novel question as a duplicate can be trusted to put enough effort to make an actual contribution”
https://www.inf.ufpr.br/renato/profession.html
Modern "AI" (LLM-based) systems are somewhat similar to the humans in this story who were taped. They may have a lot of knowledge, even a lot of knowledge that is really specialized, but once this knowledge becomes outdated or they are required to create something new - they struggle a lot. Even the systems with RAG and "continuous memory" (not sure if that's the right term) don't really learn something new. From what I know, they can accumulate the knowledge, but they still struggle with creativity and skill learning. And that may be the problem for the users of these systems as well, because they may sometimes rely on the shallow knowledge provided by the LLM model or "AI" system instead of thinking and trying to solve the problem themselves.
Luckily enough, most of the humans in our world can still follow the George's example. That's what makes us different from LLM-based systems. We can learn something new, and learn it deeply, creating the deep and unique networks of associations between different "entities" in our mind, which allows us to be truly creative. We also can dynamically update our knowledge and skills, as well as our qualities and mindset, and so on...
That's what I'm hoping for, at least.
Nothing wrong per se with citing what someone you are writing about said about themselves. He has some very odd historical, economic and political theories, but a lot of them are rooted in common misconceptions.
Apparently, Asimov was an early critic of the “Mozart in the womb” movement.
I studied classical music and came from a challenged background which to be honest is a rarity in that field. Almost everyone I studied with has parents who specifically encouraged music education and had the means to help make that happen. I got mine from some gifted vinyl as a child and fell in love with the orchestra. If I was in this story I'd probably not have been recommended to be a Professional Composer (if social expectations were the equivalent of what Asimov is saying here.)
So yeah, I'm pro 'play Mozart to your baby' :)
The callback at the end symbolizes his renewed curiosity. He is no longer ashamed of the way his mind works and if it makes him look different.