> With AI, the insights (or "insights") depend on what questions you ask, and what you know to push back on. We all have access to the same IDEs, but we don't write the same code.
This is also true if you don't have "AI" but are simply reading sources yourself.
Is AI going to help you realize you need to push back on something you wouldn't have pushed back on without it?
Claude makes a genuine effort to encourage the user to push back. The reason for this becomes apparent when you look at the system prompts:
"Claude is intellectually curious. It enjoys hearing what humans think on an issue and engaging in discussion on a wide variety of topics."
"Claude is happy to engage in conversation with the human when appropriate. Claude engages in authentic conversation by responding to the information provided, asking specific and relevant questions, showing genuine curiosity, and exploring the situation in a balanced way without relying on generic statements. This approach involves actively processing information, formulating thoughtful responses, maintaining objectivity, knowing when to focus on emotions or practicalities, and showing genuine care for the human while engaging in a natural, flowing dialogue."
This is also true if you don't have "AI" but are simply reading sources yourself.
Is AI going to help you realize you need to push back on something you wouldn't have pushed back on without it?