logoalt Hacker News

iugtmkbdfil834today at 6:18 PM1 replyview on HN

Owe is an interesting choice of a word. Don't get me wrong, I personally am of the opinion that, by default, most schools for most programs, the related body of works can be accomplished by a warm body ( some of it based on personal anecdotes -- in US mind you ). There are exceptions and those include some non-humanities and, well, people who are curious ( but that was always true for them ).

Still, just because a technology facilitates something does not make their distaste any less potent. If anything, they recognize how much of world's building blocks are a fancy facade ( mild alliteration intended ).


Replies

hirvi74today at 6:56 PM

Perhaps, owe was a poor word to use too. I will admit that, however I did not think that would be a point of focus in my comment at the time.

> in US mind you

That is my only reference.

> Still, just because a technology facilitates something does not make their distaste any less potent.

Sure, I agree once again. I may have not explained my position well initially. I just cannot help but feel it's a little hypocritical. And again, hypocritical might be a poor word to use.

We have kids booing a commencement speaker after her AI comment (which I think was a distasteful comment), but at UCLA's graduation a few days ago, we had this: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zSqOPOzrIig

(Student's explanation: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rswUgIfj1YU)

I think why I am having difficulty describing what I am thinking is because there is not one homogeneous group of students. There is clearly a subset of students that oppose AI's current and future costs/benefits. Though, at the same time, there is a different subset of students that heavily rely on AI. Some to even a problematic degree.

I have a few friends that are professors at a prestigious, private university in my city. They have all shared their little tricks in how they are trying to combat AI usage in academics. Some put hidden white text in the margins of their assignments. When citations are submitted with work, they look for the the 'utm?=chatgpt' in the urls. Some of the foreign language professors craft writing prompts with words that they know LLMs often tend to translate incorrectly.

Based on the research I can find via a few quick searches, it appears that in the populations of the studies, AI usage is far more common than AI abstinence. I imagine these students want to use AI to benefit themselves but not harm themselves in the future. I do not fault them for that in the slightest, but I do not think that is how things are going to end up working out. I strongly believe the students that misuse AI to do their work for them -- not help them -- will be in for a rude awaking.

show 1 reply