AI feeds on itself, leaving no room for serendipity, genetic mutation or imagination – factors that have driven great progress. I’m not technophobic, but I think we could rein in the frenzy this has unleashed… Well, OK, at the bottom of Pandora’s box, there was also hope 
2 Likes
It may be but if only one of the zillions of people learning how to use AI by downloading cat videos eventually finds a way how to save the planet, then it is worth it.
I think we are looking at the wrong problem to solve. We will get nowhere by banning cat lovers. We need better cleaner power solutions and computing power that generates less water demands.
Fair enough, but when you buy a house in early spring & had no influence over the preceding months…things get green.
1 Like
What you’ve argued for is something that’s an extremely unlikely possibility.
OTOH data centres certainly have major downsides, obviously environmentally, but increasingly culturally/intellectually. A sea of AI slop is driving a dumbing down of the general public.
4 Likes
Is your solution to ban AI altogether or restrict it’s use to those who are intellectually capable?
2 Likes
The problem isn’t AI per se, it’s the proliferation of data centres and the banality of too many applications of AI. Many other forms of technology have restricted access, but unfortunately the genie is now out of the bottle.
You probably remember the utopian promises of what the world wide-web would bring, few downsides appeared apparent at the time because increased communication and easy access to information (as opposed to acquiring knowledge) was thought to be wholly beneficial, whereas it’s been a mixed blessing with many unforeseen negative social consequences.
8 Likes
I’m having a grin here because Mik it seems you’re balancing the vague possibility that maybe one day one person in the world that wastes AI resource downloading cat photos might change the world, against the known certainty of energy and water guzzling data centres AI definitely eats.
5 Likes
I was,of course being hyperbolic Karen. People have to start learning about AI somewhere unless you are going to restrict access to the intellectually competent. I am not sure how that could work and who would judge competency.
Good for Seattle, I hope more follow.
Like all AI interactions, if its important, you should really verify the answers you get - ask where /how the answer was obtained from. LLMs, because they are developed using information which in most cases has it’s base from work done by humans may contain errors, as well as the alogrithms which are created in the first instance by humans.
1 Like
And particularly AI is trained to provide the answers it expects you to want, without any need for them to be real or founded in fact. Even if you ask for references they might not be genuine, and require careful reading to be certain they have not been misrepresented. It IS a super useful tool, but it’s not a) intelligent and b) able to read minds or understand human needs and nuances.
5 Likes
Soon, if not already, the LLMs are learning from reading AI generated websites that may contain false information. Vicious loop.
1 Like
I found this research in a Facebook post and it makes for scary reading:
Another reason for the decline in student reading capability is increasing reliance on generative AI. In June 2025, Nataliya Kosmyna and colleagues at the MIT Media Lab released a preprint titled “Your Brain on ChatGPT.”
They divided 54 participants into three groups writing SAT-style essays — one using ChatGPT, the second group using a search engine, the last group using nothing — and monitored brain activity with a 32-channel EEG. The ChatGPT group showed the lowest neural connectivity of the three, with up to 55 percent reduced connectivity compared with the brain-only group, and “consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels.”
Eighty-three percent of LLM users could not quote a single line from essays they had written minutes earlier. When the LLM group was forced to write without AI in a follow-up session, their brain activity did not bounce back to baseline; the researchers coined the term “cognitive debt” for the lingering deficit.
This is the first neurophysiological evidence that early reliance on LLMs measurably alters the brain’s engagement with writing tasks, and it is consistent with what those of us in front of classrooms are watching happen in real time. When I assign analysis, I am not trying to extract a polished product; I am trying to put the student’s mind through resistance in order to make it stronger.
Offloading the struggle to a chatbot does not “free students up for higher-order work.” It deprives them of building the strength to do any substantial cognitive work at all.
5 Likes
That’s been apparent in HE for some time and universities are employing various term time strategies to deal it . Greater emphasis on submitting planning notes, and essay drafts and F2F tutorials before writing the final essay.
I like the expression “cognitive debt”, however I think I have been suffering from it long before AI was invented.
Ah well, best stay even further away from AI then, that’s what I plan to do. 
There is no AI you can use for ethical reasons. They are all infringing copyright, destroying the environment and are just the lastest in a long line of tech-bro Ponzi schemes that will inevitably result in big write-downs by institutional investors
3 Likes
I remember the dot-com bubble that burst in 2000. I worked for a company then that lost 95% of it’s value in weeks. The AI hype is exactly the same and that will burst as well. There will be carnage amongst AI firms and only some will survive. I hope it takes X/xAI with it. That doesn’t mean that AI isn’t useful or game changing just like the internet in 2000, it’s just that in a crowded market there just isn’t room just like when the dot-com bubble burst.
Yet again I have found ChatGPT incredibly useful. This time, I’m looking for a modern light oak sideboard and have seen two I like very much on the Habitat France website. And I’m trying to find something similar in the UK, but with little success. It seems to me the French styling is streaks ahead of the British stuff. The “advice” I’ve had from ChatGPT has been spot on. And completely sums up why the French style suits me.
A few UK brands I’d investigate further
These are more likely to have something close to your brief than the mainstream chains:
- Tikamoon (keep checking for new arrivals)
- Kave Home
- La Redoute Intérieurs
- Swoon
- Woodman
- HKliving
- The Cotswold Company (occasionally)
- Cox & Cox
In particular, Kave Home often does light oak veneer sideboards around 180–200 cm with rounded edges and concealed openings at prices that fit your budget.
One other thought
Looking at the Helena Pille pieces, what makes them special isn’t really the doors or storage layout. It’s the outer frame—the softly radiused oak surround that wraps the whole cabinet.
Most UK sideboards miss that detail. They have square carcasses with doors attached.
If I were helping a friend furnish a house in Chichester and they loved those Habitat France designs, I’d rather spend six months finding the right 200 cm piece with rounded framing than buy a 175 cm unit that was merely “close enough.”
The sofa width you’ve given me reinforces that view: 195–200 cm feels like the sweet spot for the room.
I just wish the chat style didn’t pretend to be from my best friend!
1 Like