Sadly, nope, if you can read at a high school level, there’s roughly a 75% chance you are smarter than any rando you meet.
For the last 5 or 10 years, more and more kids graduate highschool with middleschool or worse reading / writing abilities.
People even make tiktoks about going off to college and admitting they literally cannot understand the words in their assigned texts, start going through some kind of literacy crash course…
Some people even make videos like that explaining that even after a Bachelor’s or Associates degree, nope, still can barely read.
I am starting to notice this in the slop youtube throws at me that I am sometimes dumb enough to click on.
Somebody reading some article to give commentary on it, and you can just tell they are reading one word at a time, misunderstanding what 15% of them mean, have to actually stop on 5% of the words because those ones they’ve never read before, and then they start complaining that the author must have just been using a thesaurus… because a few of the vocab words in the article are 8th grade or above.
… I picked up reading quickly, so quickly that when I was in 2nd grade, I was assigned to go out into the hall when I was done with my classwork (I always finished rapidly) and then go help a 4th or 5th grader who was behind in reading skills, go sit with them and have them or me read aloud, help them with words they didn’t know, etc.
Everyday, even on the net, I encounter more people who… are beyond graduating high school age, who barely read better than 5th graders with dyslexia.
I love how today actual literacy isn’t even a thing. No one talks about teaching readimg and writing (in the EU, at least). It’s all about financial literacy, digital literacy, social media literacy, hell, even (and bear with me here) AI literacy. Yes, really. There’s probably 800 of these fake literacies floating around.
Whoever thought of this is an idiot. The word literacy means one thing: the ability to read and write (and perhaps understand what you read/wrote). Nothing more, nothing less.
It isn’t just stupid, it’s also malicious. Kids all over the globe are suffering from poor literacy, and instead of fixing the problem you quite literally shift the goalposts.
Why be able to read and consult a dictionary when I can just consult AI or social media to explain it to my borderline-illiterate brain?
When AI services enshittify by raising their price barriers, or when just… infrastructure generally collapses to a serious degree such that many people just literally cannot use them…
Much of Gen Z and A, either reliant on or just totally raised on using AI to do their thinking and work for them…
They will basically go feral, they won’t be able to get their fix, a part of their ‘brain’ will have been ‘removed’, and they will literally be dysfunctional.
And I shouldn’t just single out younger people, though its more prevalent and severe with them, there are certainly many millenials and older who’ve also just given up good chunks of their thinking abilities to AI, which is largely a proprietary service that go undergo a price hike just like Xbox or Netflix.
… I used to think the ending to DX Human Revolution was a tropey cop out, that broke from basically the rest of the game’s narrative and gameplay themes, just a zombie apocalypse at the end of your spy thriller.
Now I realize that was the point, maybe still a bit hamfisted or over the top, but… yep, yep, people become reliant on things they aren’t actually 8n control of for just basic day to day living, and then you actually break that, take it away from them?
Yep, zombie apocalypse is not too far off from what would actually play out.
Bro what are you smoking. Gen-Z is getting up their 30s, they’re by far the most vocally anti-AI group out there. The only ones who willingly and readily outsource their brains to it are boomers.
By most definitions, the oldest Gen Z would have been born in 1997 and would thus be 28, the youngest Gen Z would have been born in 2012 and would thus be 13.
So uh… yeah, yeah, younger Gen Zs are very susceptible to what I described.
And also… sure, a lot of Gen Zs are very anti-AI.
A lot of them are also the very techbro douche bag types that jump from tech scam to tech scam, tell people how AI will make it so much easier for them to do some … thing they have no idea how to do.
The people who most often use AI tools every day are Gen Z.
Millennials may be more likely to use them in some professional work capacity, (largely because they are simply more likely to have jobs where thats part of it) but its Gen Z and younger that… have significant chunks that literally just do all their homework and college work with AI tools and thus never learn anything.
Millenials are, you know, too old to have been able to take that shortcut. Same with GenX and Boomers, though I do agree they are more willing to give up actually thinking as they age.
Now older gens use those tools at work, yes, but… when you take them away, they will go away from work last, and for general consumer use first…
…and people who were not able to AI their way through school will still have some of those core mental capabilities, whereas people who never learned those core abilities, had AI do their school for them… won’t have any core abilities.
If the oldest Gen-Zer is 28, and youngest is 13, assuming an even distribution, that puts the average Gen-Z is roughly 20 and a half, long past done with school, assuming school means school and does not include university or higher ed and stops at 18, then in fact the vast majority of Gen-Z are done with the vast majority of school.
This invalidates your point, and while I’m curious about your rather odd source link that I’m not clicking till I can verify what that is at the desktop, I doubt it supports your free-associative generational generalisations about ill-defined spooks like “mindset” and some ramblings about tech scams that you happily append to your maybe-true data point about AI tool use.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but it’s embarrassing to make such an obvious error in an argument where you claim “kids these days” are somehow dumber.
The skill involved in not simply parroting points that fit your conclusions, but actually understanding what you’re parroting is called critical thinking.
As one of those “kids these days” who is 27, from my experience, very much including this exchange, boomers and the vast majority of Gen X have absolutely no intellectual capabilities and interacting with one makes it exceedingly obvious.
They often cannot read, and if they can - they cannot read more than a paragraph without getting lost, and they often cannot write properly either.
This makes sense when you consider that even in the laziest pursuit of talking with a chatbot – the average Gen-Zer probably reads more text in a day incidentally than an average Gen Xer reads in their entire life even if they’re fairly well-read.
A thought that’s been popular during the pandemic is how “our brains” weren’t “meant” to process all the information that comes from the internet and that it leads to some sort of overwhelming of the faculties, but in personal anecdote - I’ve never experienced this or even known anyone who has. If I trust my eyes and ears (and pretend like IRL isn’t just another, arguably far more self-serving selective echo chamber than any corporate algo even like the olds do), I could easily conclude that misinformation in general is a phenomenon almost entirely confined to people over the age of Gen-Z.
While the move to video is a real phenomenon, I would argue that it does not by itself evidence a decline in basic intelligence, and is a self-fulfilling prophecy where monetisation on video was much easier to do well due to inherently better CTR/engagement/impact on impressions than traditional banner ads that supported written sides, leading for it to be more widespread and therefore concentrating a lot of useful and entertaining content and information in video, leading people to read less.
Again, though – the above is a side tangent because most Gen-Z were born long before this phenomenon occurred.
And before you bring this up - yes, literacy rates have gone down due to the economic decline/collapse of the western capitalist model and monetary policies of austerity alongside the culture of anti-intellectualism and gerontocracy who perpetuates it like their arteries perpetuate lead in their bloodstream, but again – this does not impact the vast majority of Gen-Z who are done with the vast majority of school.
While I’m no scientist and I actually don’t think I’m smart at all, I do think what thinking skills I do have - I owe to exposure to various “tech scams”, making mistakes, examining them, disregarding authority, not blindly trusting, learning the difference between an opinion and truth, and learning to reason correctly.
It is exposure to information - good and bad - that makes you a decent judge of information.
Also, while I focus my equally free-associative personal anecdote observations (the immovable object to the unstoppable force of an overly broad generalisation) on the boomers and the gen-x, but millennials to me while definitely more outwardly intelligent probably due to better education, diet, habit and lesser alcohol consumption, overall they lack a certain rigour and intensity required to truly drill deep.
Looking back at political debates and discussions during the Great financial crash in 2008, it really does feel like I’m watching simpletons talk about rather basic things as if they’re complex and puzzling. I stand on the shoulder of giants etc. etc. but this even applies to ideas that to them and me are equally from the distant past.
You could just look up actual population distributions, they’re not that hard to find, and you’ve just completely rejected my sourced claims, while acknowledging that’s what you’re doing.
I didn’t say all Gen Z.
I said younger Gen Z.
You’re getting massively hung up over misunderstanding that.
I also, in my original comment you responded to, made it clear that… this kind of problem certainly is not wholly specific to one age group, but it is more pronounced in those that never knew an era without widely proliferated digital technology.
You then say me repeating what my source says is “an embrassing mistake”.
You then make a bunch of anecdotal claims and just operate as if they are objective fact.
You then say you find the … very well established concept of information overload to be ludicrous, because you specifically do not apparently experience this.
I guess uh, see also: choice paralysis, a very similar and also well established concept in economics and marketing.
You then pontificate about general intelligence levels… when again, you can just look these things up, you can just see that US literacy scores in schools and colleges peaked around 2010-2012 and have then rapidly declined, similar with numeracy.
And yes, I am bringing that up, because uh… yeah, most Gen Z would have graduated either high school or college after that peak.
But you’re more interested with your own internal idea of what facts may exist, as opposed actually refering to any sources.
Its extremely ironic to me, perhaps you could even say embarassing, that you Zoomer tell me Millenial that I lack the intellectual rigor to drill deep, when… you are the one who refused ro view my source, mocked it and me, and then went on to invent a scenario that makes sense based on your vague recollection of some data and also personal anecdotes.
Go on then, find the data I’ve here referenced, you will discover I am correct, and you are largely making things up and doing logic based on fuzzy data.
… you put in air quotes “mindset” as if that was something I said, a word I used in anything you are responding to.
I daresay you are overwhelmed with too much information and have been uh, fudging the details of your evaluation of it.
In other words, you’re doing the autistic version of projection, all the reasoning faults you are accusing me of doing are… the ones you are doing, and I know what that looks like because I am also autistic and used to do that when I was younger and/or flustered, seen a lot of other autists do it too.
you’re doing the autistic version of projection, all the reasoning faults you are accusing me of doing are… the ones you are doing, and I know what that looks like because I am also autistic and used to do that when I was younger and/or flustered, seen a lot of other autists do it too.
Unhinged.
I’m not wasting time writing an in-depth response to someone who holds up economics and marketing as if they are sciences and their concepts hold serious value, and does so to accuse me of having autism lol wtf
I think if anyone has information overload it’s you, I’m not viewing your dodgy source link that starts with “read-vip.variety” until I can verify it’s legit, as I said.
I wasn’t even suggesting that your data point was incorrect either, I said it was “maybe-true”, it wasn’t relevant because the rest of your argument barely connected to it.
you can just look things up
Yeah I thought so too, but then people like you take numbers and just not understand them, so I guess maybe you can’t just look things up.
Sadly, nope, if you can read at a high school level, there’s roughly a 75% chance you are smarter than any rando you meet.
For the last 5 or 10 years, more and more kids graduate highschool with middleschool or worse reading / writing abilities.
People even make tiktoks about going off to college and admitting they literally cannot understand the words in their assigned texts, start going through some kind of literacy crash course…
Some people even make videos like that explaining that even after a Bachelor’s or Associates degree, nope, still can barely read.
I am starting to notice this in the slop youtube throws at me that I am sometimes dumb enough to click on.
Somebody reading some article to give commentary on it, and you can just tell they are reading one word at a time, misunderstanding what 15% of them mean, have to actually stop on 5% of the words because those ones they’ve never read before, and then they start complaining that the author must have just been using a thesaurus… because a few of the vocab words in the article are 8th grade or above.
… I picked up reading quickly, so quickly that when I was in 2nd grade, I was assigned to go out into the hall when I was done with my classwork (I always finished rapidly) and then go help a 4th or 5th grader who was behind in reading skills, go sit with them and have them or me read aloud, help them with words they didn’t know, etc.
Everyday, even on the net, I encounter more people who… are beyond graduating high school age, who barely read better than 5th graders with dyslexia.
I love how today actual literacy isn’t even a thing. No one talks about teaching readimg and writing (in the EU, at least). It’s all about financial literacy, digital literacy, social media literacy, hell, even (and bear with me here) AI literacy. Yes, really. There’s probably 800 of these fake literacies floating around.
Whoever thought of this is an idiot. The word literacy means one thing: the ability to read and write (and perhaps understand what you read/wrote). Nothing more, nothing less.
It isn’t just stupid, it’s also malicious. Kids all over the globe are suffering from poor literacy, and instead of fixing the problem you quite literally shift the goalposts.
Why be able to read and consult a dictionary when I can just consult AI or social media to explain it to my borderline-illiterate brain?
When AI services enshittify by raising their price barriers, or when just… infrastructure generally collapses to a serious degree such that many people just literally cannot use them…
Much of Gen Z and A, either reliant on or just totally raised on using AI to do their thinking and work for them…
They will basically go feral, they won’t be able to get their fix, a part of their ‘brain’ will have been ‘removed’, and they will literally be dysfunctional.
And I shouldn’t just single out younger people, though its more prevalent and severe with them, there are certainly many millenials and older who’ve also just given up good chunks of their thinking abilities to AI, which is largely a proprietary service that go undergo a price hike just like Xbox or Netflix.
… I used to think the ending to DX Human Revolution was a tropey cop out, that broke from basically the rest of the game’s narrative and gameplay themes, just a zombie apocalypse at the end of your spy thriller.
Now I realize that was the point, maybe still a bit hamfisted or over the top, but… yep, yep, people become reliant on things they aren’t actually 8n control of for just basic day to day living, and then you actually break that, take it away from them?
Yep, zombie apocalypse is not too far off from what would actually play out.
Bro what are you smoking. Gen-Z is getting up their 30s, they’re by far the most vocally anti-AI group out there. The only ones who willingly and readily outsource their brains to it are boomers.
By most definitions, the oldest Gen Z would have been born in 1997 and would thus be 28, the youngest Gen Z would have been born in 2012 and would thus be 13.
So uh… yeah, yeah, younger Gen Zs are very susceptible to what I described.
And also… sure, a lot of Gen Zs are very anti-AI.
A lot of them are also the very techbro douche bag types that jump from tech scam to tech scam, tell people how AI will make it so much easier for them to do some … thing they have no idea how to do.
Its polarizing, but we have actual data.
https://read-vip.variety.com/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=Variety+VIP&edid=68aabfc0-da35-441a-aa16-b7fa7824a5f8
The people who most often use AI tools every day are Gen Z.
Millennials may be more likely to use them in some professional work capacity, (largely because they are simply more likely to have jobs where thats part of it) but its Gen Z and younger that… have significant chunks that literally just do all their homework and college work with AI tools and thus never learn anything.
Millenials are, you know, too old to have been able to take that shortcut. Same with GenX and Boomers, though I do agree they are more willing to give up actually thinking as they age.
Now older gens use those tools at work, yes, but… when you take them away, they will go away from work last, and for general consumer use first…
…and people who were not able to AI their way through school will still have some of those core mental capabilities, whereas people who never learned those core abilities, had AI do their school for them… won’t have any core abilities.
If the oldest Gen-Zer is 28, and youngest is 13, assuming an even distribution, that puts the average Gen-Z is roughly 20 and a half, long past done with school, assuming school means school and does not include university or higher ed and stops at 18, then in fact the vast majority of Gen-Z are done with the vast majority of school.
This invalidates your point, and while I’m curious about your rather odd source link that I’m not clicking till I can verify what that is at the desktop, I doubt it supports your free-associative generational generalisations about ill-defined spooks like “mindset” and some ramblings about tech scams that you happily append to your maybe-true data point about AI tool use.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but it’s embarrassing to make such an obvious error in an argument where you claim “kids these days” are somehow dumber.
The skill involved in not simply parroting points that fit your conclusions, but actually understanding what you’re parroting is called critical thinking.
As one of those “kids these days” who is 27, from my experience, very much including this exchange, boomers and the vast majority of Gen X have absolutely no intellectual capabilities and interacting with one makes it exceedingly obvious.
They often cannot read, and if they can - they cannot read more than a paragraph without getting lost, and they often cannot write properly either.
This makes sense when you consider that even in the laziest pursuit of talking with a chatbot – the average Gen-Zer probably reads more text in a day incidentally than an average Gen Xer reads in their entire life even if they’re fairly well-read.
A thought that’s been popular during the pandemic is how “our brains” weren’t “meant” to process all the information that comes from the internet and that it leads to some sort of overwhelming of the faculties, but in personal anecdote - I’ve never experienced this or even known anyone who has. If I trust my eyes and ears (and pretend like IRL isn’t just another, arguably far more self-serving selective echo chamber than any corporate algo even like the olds do), I could easily conclude that misinformation in general is a phenomenon almost entirely confined to people over the age of Gen-Z.
While the move to video is a real phenomenon, I would argue that it does not by itself evidence a decline in basic intelligence, and is a self-fulfilling prophecy where monetisation on video was much easier to do well due to inherently better CTR/engagement/impact on impressions than traditional banner ads that supported written sides, leading for it to be more widespread and therefore concentrating a lot of useful and entertaining content and information in video, leading people to read less.
Again, though – the above is a side tangent because most Gen-Z were born long before this phenomenon occurred.
And before you bring this up - yes, literacy rates have gone down due to the economic decline/collapse of the western capitalist model and monetary policies of austerity alongside the culture of anti-intellectualism and gerontocracy who perpetuates it like their arteries perpetuate lead in their bloodstream, but again – this does not impact the vast majority of Gen-Z who are done with the vast majority of school.
While I’m no scientist and I actually don’t think I’m smart at all, I do think what thinking skills I do have - I owe to exposure to various “tech scams”, making mistakes, examining them, disregarding authority, not blindly trusting, learning the difference between an opinion and truth, and learning to reason correctly.
It is exposure to information - good and bad - that makes you a decent judge of information.
Also, while I focus my equally free-associative personal anecdote observations (the immovable object to the unstoppable force of an overly broad generalisation) on the boomers and the gen-x, but millennials to me while definitely more outwardly intelligent probably due to better education, diet, habit and lesser alcohol consumption, overall they lack a certain rigour and intensity required to truly drill deep.
Looking back at political debates and discussions during the Great financial crash in 2008, it really does feel like I’m watching simpletons talk about rather basic things as if they’re complex and puzzling. I stand on the shoulder of giants etc. etc. but this even applies to ideas that to them and me are equally from the distant past.
You could just look up actual population distributions, they’re not that hard to find, and you’ve just completely rejected my sourced claims, while acknowledging that’s what you’re doing.
I didn’t say all Gen Z.
I said younger Gen Z.
You’re getting massively hung up over misunderstanding that.
I also, in my original comment you responded to, made it clear that… this kind of problem certainly is not wholly specific to one age group, but it is more pronounced in those that never knew an era without widely proliferated digital technology.
You then say me repeating what my source says is “an embrassing mistake”.
You then make a bunch of anecdotal claims and just operate as if they are objective fact.
You then say you find the … very well established concept of information overload to be ludicrous, because you specifically do not apparently experience this.
I guess uh, see also: choice paralysis, a very similar and also well established concept in economics and marketing.
You then pontificate about general intelligence levels… when again, you can just look these things up, you can just see that US literacy scores in schools and colleges peaked around 2010-2012 and have then rapidly declined, similar with numeracy.
And yes, I am bringing that up, because uh… yeah, most Gen Z would have graduated either high school or college after that peak.
But you’re more interested with your own internal idea of what facts may exist, as opposed actually refering to any sources.
Its extremely ironic to me, perhaps you could even say embarassing, that you Zoomer tell me Millenial that I lack the intellectual rigor to drill deep, when… you are the one who refused ro view my source, mocked it and me, and then went on to invent a scenario that makes sense based on your vague recollection of some data and also personal anecdotes.
Go on then, find the data I’ve here referenced, you will discover I am correct, and you are largely making things up and doing logic based on fuzzy data.
… you put in air quotes “mindset” as if that was something I said, a word I used in anything you are responding to.
I daresay you are overwhelmed with too much information and have been uh, fudging the details of your evaluation of it.
In other words, you’re doing the autistic version of projection, all the reasoning faults you are accusing me of doing are… the ones you are doing, and I know what that looks like because I am also autistic and used to do that when I was younger and/or flustered, seen a lot of other autists do it too.
Unhinged.
I’m not wasting time writing an in-depth response to someone who holds up economics and marketing as if they are sciences and their concepts hold serious value, and does so to accuse me of having autism lol wtf
I think if anyone has information overload it’s you, I’m not viewing your dodgy source link that starts with “read-vip.variety” until I can verify it’s legit, as I said.
I wasn’t even suggesting that your data point was incorrect either, I said it was “maybe-true”, it wasn’t relevant because the rest of your argument barely connected to it.
Yeah I thought so too, but then people like you take numbers and just not understand them, so I guess maybe you can’t just look things up.