Just wanna point out that every time something scares you enough, it also reprograms/rewires your brain. Not trying to discredit the study, but the reprogramming really isn't the concern; it's if the reprogramming is beneficial, which this isn't.

The name and presentation of that site has a veneer of legitimacy, but it really doesn't seem credible.

I warned about this for the past 3 years. The WHO wants universal mental health care and to drug at least a billion of us.

Do Viruses Exist?

There's also a lot of general antivax stuff.

Now, sharing a lot of ... Questionable articles... Doesn't make the article in question invalid. It does however call into extreme doubt any editorial context the site might be adding.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.08872

This is the actual study being referenced. It's conclusions are significantly less severe than this presents them as, while still conveying "LLMs are not generally the best tool for facilitating education".

trade-off highlights an important educational concern: AI tools, while valuable for supporting performance, may unintentionally hinder deep cognitive processing, retention, and authentic engagement with written material. If users rely heavily on AI tools, they may achieve superficial fluency but fail to internalize the knowledge or feel a sense of ownership over it.

from an educational standpoint, these results suggest that strategic timing of AI tool introduction following initial self-driven effort may enhance engagement and neural integration. The corresponding EEG markers indicate this may be a more neurocognitively optimal sequence than consistent AI tool usage from the outset

Ultimately, this isn't saying AI tools cause brain damage or make you stupid. It's saying that learning via LLM often causes worse retention of the information being learned. It also says that search engines and LLMs can remove certain types of cognitive load that are not conducive to retention, making learning easier and faster in some cases where engagement can be kept high.

It's important to be clear and honest about what a study is saying, even if it's not as unequivocally negative as the venue might appreciate.

Amusingly using what appears to be an AI generated image.

Tech bros stay losing, it is a good day

Hooray!

We invented cyberpsychosis, for reals!

Isn't it so cool to live in a cyberpunk dystopia!?!

Brb, gonna go OD on some early access/preview alpha braindances!

There’s a good body of research on cognitive capacity and creativity in regard to enriching environments. Even down to rats. Give rats playgrounds and toys and they perform better at memory tasks and solving puzzles.

I suppose you could train rats to press a button to get a human to come solve problems for them. Take the human away, then what?

What’s insidious here is the same over scheduled kids, having their childhoods choreographed for enrichment, are often the ones coming out of childhood with critical thinking, anxiety, and socialization deficits, we think because they’re using their phones for every problem solve.

There are a million legit reasons to avoid and despise LLMs, their makers, and their pushers. I don't think this is one of them.

Literally every piece of technology introduced in the past thousand years has had this kind of hue and cry built up around it, beginning with the printing press and books in Europe. Every form of communication or information technology has had "studies" (or what passed for them in ages past) claiming that the new technology would ruin the minds and morals of people who used it. Remember when television would "rot kids' minds"? Remember when the Internet was going to end civilization as we know it?

This study is just more of the same. You'll find equivalent studies about television back in the '50s to even as late as the '70s.

There are (a myriad of) good arguments for despising LLMs. This (not yet peer-reviewed) MIT study is not one of them. (And I should point out that the actual paper instead of this summary of it has quite a bit more nuance than is reported in the linked article.)

Related post from when this was initially published: https://midwest.social/post/30021473

Oh, baby, did you read the thing? Something tells me you didn't read the thing.