Hey Mark, thanks for sharing. Great article! Though it looks like you were writing about keeping up with AI news. This is not about that - it’s about keeping up with AI’s speed while chatting with it.
Oh yes - you’re right, of course! Totally agree with that too. Generally all of it is so rushed. Way too much information from all angles. Simplification and streamlining feels like an attractive path.
Hey Madeleine! I must have screwed up with my title, because mine wasn't about keeping up with AI news, blogs, posts, tool launches etc (which is what - I agree -- it seems everyone is writing about). It was about keeping up with AI in the chat. It's speed creates the psychological impact of FOMO -- i.e. I have to type as fast as it types, think as fast as it thinks, keep moving forward in a brainstorming chat with AI even though I really should stop and think about what I'm doing. Does that make sense? Two different types of FOMO, I think. One has to do with the outside world, one has to do with the world within the chat.
Great article Mike - I like the perspective about the difference in information processing speeds from a biological level. I played with some related concepts in this post (https://mikewhitaker1.substack.com/p/all-struggle-is-not-created-equal?r=mld5). I attempted to differentiate between legacy friction (slowness in our processes and institutions that exists because of human capacity limitations but does not inherently add value) and designed friction (friction we choose to keep because the "slowness" or delay leads to better outcomes). As AI's capabilities challenges prior constraints, key questions will include what friction in our systems we choose to keep because the friction itself adds value AND where do we need to insert friction intentionally to generate better outcomes when machine speed encounters human systems.
Mike, thanks for your thought provoking post about an emerging & likely widely felt phenomena. It needs a name. I definitely experience what you describe. It’s a MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over) situation that occurs while scrolling the streams of LLM output, struggling to make sense of it, and simultaneously being cognitively engage/focused. It does lead to rapid cognitive fatigue and the desire to close the LLM, often without a tangible value-add from the exchanges. Thanks for articulating this.
MEGO is perfect. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to name and describe it - and I realize now I should have just called you. Well said, indeed. It'll be interesting to see how AI companies react to this as it becomes more widely discussed (which I expect will occur this year.) Will they train their LLMs to produce shorter outputs? At what cost? Will people like it? My guess is no - but time will tell.
I wrote about this here https://open.substack.com/pub/dangerousaideas/p/on-keeping-up-with-ai
Hey Mark, thanks for sharing. Great article! Though it looks like you were writing about keeping up with AI news. This is not about that - it’s about keeping up with AI’s speed while chatting with it.
Everyone seems to have written about this. Here’s my tuppence worth, entitled “Shhhhh” https://open.substack.com/pub/madeleinechampagnie/p/shhhhhhhh?r=6hgjl&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay
Oh yes - you’re right, of course! Totally agree with that too. Generally all of it is so rushed. Way too much information from all angles. Simplification and streamlining feels like an attractive path.
Hey Madeleine! I must have screwed up with my title, because mine wasn't about keeping up with AI news, blogs, posts, tool launches etc (which is what - I agree -- it seems everyone is writing about). It was about keeping up with AI in the chat. It's speed creates the psychological impact of FOMO -- i.e. I have to type as fast as it types, think as fast as it thinks, keep moving forward in a brainstorming chat with AI even though I really should stop and think about what I'm doing. Does that make sense? Two different types of FOMO, I think. One has to do with the outside world, one has to do with the world within the chat.
Great article Mike - I like the perspective about the difference in information processing speeds from a biological level. I played with some related concepts in this post (https://mikewhitaker1.substack.com/p/all-struggle-is-not-created-equal?r=mld5). I attempted to differentiate between legacy friction (slowness in our processes and institutions that exists because of human capacity limitations but does not inherently add value) and designed friction (friction we choose to keep because the "slowness" or delay leads to better outcomes). As AI's capabilities challenges prior constraints, key questions will include what friction in our systems we choose to keep because the friction itself adds value AND where do we need to insert friction intentionally to generate better outcomes when machine speed encounters human systems.
Mike, thanks for your thought provoking post about an emerging & likely widely felt phenomena. It needs a name. I definitely experience what you describe. It’s a MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over) situation that occurs while scrolling the streams of LLM output, struggling to make sense of it, and simultaneously being cognitively engage/focused. It does lead to rapid cognitive fatigue and the desire to close the LLM, often without a tangible value-add from the exchanges. Thanks for articulating this.
MEGO is perfect. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to name and describe it - and I realize now I should have just called you. Well said, indeed. It'll be interesting to see how AI companies react to this as it becomes more widely discussed (which I expect will occur this year.) Will they train their LLMs to produce shorter outputs? At what cost? Will people like it? My guess is no - but time will tell.
https://open.substack.com/pub/themessywritersclub/p/my-poem-went-viral?r=3miwbp&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay