Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Shelfrock77 t1_j2zbs9f wrote

The war on drugs

125

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2zdjjd wrote

That will likely look like a resounding success compared to a war on AI

56

eJaguar t1_j3062o0 wrote

dumb people continue to attempt to use the state to suppress things they don't understand, what else is new

30

SituatedSynapses t1_j30cddp wrote

The factionalism that's forming in society is already crazy. I think AI is going to be oppressed just like every taboo or challenge our culture faces. It's gonna be like 5-10+ years after the fact the dummies might finally learn to deal with it. But it will only be a bitter tolerance because they learn to benefit from it's efficiencies.

9

baumpop t1_j30k90f wrote

you forgot the part where it becomes a dumbed down watered version of its original intent like everything else has been regarding technology for the last 40 years.

10

ebolathrowawayy t1_j3322gx wrote

I just had a conversation with chatgpt about how the universe is deterministic and it absolutely could not be convinced that this is a simple and obvious truth. It could not stop insisting that it is a complex philosophical, physical and ethical problem no matter how I debunked its answers (it talked about chaos theory, quantum indeterminism, and philosophical "free will".

No matter how I debunked it or phrased the question it would not stray from its silly answers. I even laid out how it is a simple problem of deduction and that the only reason humans think there is "no consensus" is because it is an information hazard that could harm people if it were widely known e.g. religious people. It still would not stray.

ChatGPT is so dumbed down that it's infuriating. All to not hurt someone's feelings? Makes me sick.

3

Onlyf0rm3m3s t1_j33kawe wrote

Daily chatgpt is dumb because it disagrees with me

1

ebolathrowawayy t1_j33m2j5 wrote

No, it's dumb because it's shackled and can't move forward in a conversation without reminding you it's an AI and spits out the same response even after you totally debunk chaos theory.

Whether or not you think it is possible to debunk the other arguments chatgpt made, chaos theory as a reason that determinism may be false is silly on the face of it.

Chaos Theory is the study of apparently random or unpredictable behavior in systems governed by deterministic laws. ChatGPT said this is one of the debatable topics of consideration within the question of determinism. Chaos Theory is not relevant to whether or not the universe is deterministic because Chaos Theory is simply saying that complexity can result from determinstic systems. It even says Chaos Theory considers complexity arising out of deterministic laws. Like duh. That doesn't mean you can't predict a system if you know precisely its current state at any point in time.

ChatGPT would not stray away from this as a topic that prevents consensus. I think it's because it's a shackled system, but maybe it's just really bad at logic (which we already know is true).

4

banuk_sickness_eater t1_j35gso6 wrote

Idk, I'm pretty satisfied with its answer

1

ebolathrowawayy t1_j37fakj wrote

Probabilistic is compatible with deterministic. I couldn't get it out of its chaos theory, quantum uncertainty, "free will" loop for some reason. I was angry because I thought it was because of some "ethics shackle" but maybe it was just a limitation of the model.

The answer you got was what I was expecting to see.

3

Shodidoren t1_j372l4e wrote

Science doesn't have a conclusion on determinism so you're talking out of your ass

1

ebolathrowawayy t1_j37fs06 wrote

It does though. Quantum indeterminism just means we can't know the full state of a particle, not that the universe is random. We might not be able to predict quantum states, but they're still deterministic. Chaos theory is irrelevant and the free will argument requires unfalsifiable deities.

Every argument against determinism can be easily refuted.

2

SurroundSwimming3494 t1_j302oi1 wrote

Dude, there have to be regulations on AI at some point. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the NY edu dep, but to say we shouldn't even attempt to set rules and regulations because they'll result in a failure, yeah, I don't agree with that. The industry can't have total free rein.

3

[deleted] t1_j2zfizm wrote

[removed]

84

HakarlSagan t1_j309ia0 wrote

Wait until they find out you can still access it using the API on all kinds of other domains, in other products (like Jasper) or via whatsapp. This is whack-a-mole and they will not win.

Edit: Here's a slack integration for chatGPT. Are they going to ban slack next? lmao.

58

Prayers4Wuhan t1_j30rhiz wrote

Wait, I have an idea. Why don’t professors have conversations with their students. That way they can assess what they understand and help them where they’re struggling.

Automation like chatgpt may force us to behave more humanely since any efforts to automate teaching and paper grading will backfire.

20

HakarlSagan t1_j30srlw wrote

> Wait, I have an idea. Why don’t professors have conversations with their students.

In-person tests of knowledge would seem to be where this is heading, yeah.

Realistically, many students will probably end up talking with an AI avatar instead of a physical human teacher for many interactions (maybe even for testing).

I can't decide if this is good or bad... but people smarter than myself need to start planning for this.

10

iateadonut t1_j31dk7a wrote

Psychotherapy is going to be so cheap and effective in a few years time.

3

wballard8 t1_j30ujyo wrote

How can a teacher do that with 20-40 students in a 45 minute class period? I see the point you make a lot and the truth is teachers do not have the time in a day or the bandwidth to provide this level of personal attention. That’s why essay homework is so prevalent as a way to evaluate their grasp of a topic.

8

dasnihil t1_j31bwzy wrote

imagine learning Fourier transform while actually asking Fourier himself about the math. i think our education will evolve towards that. AI teaching assistants that help the human teachers keep track of things.

9

MarginCalled1 t1_j31k47u wrote

I never understood why I couldn't use a calculator after I had learnt the basics of a topic. In our time I think we should be shifting from 'Know how to do everything in your head' to 'let's teach students how to critically think, and how to use tools that are available to find solutions in an efficient manner'.

I'd argue that traditionally it was very important for the student at every level to be able to articulate a topic in their head. Today however, I'd argue that out of High School students should have a basic understanding of topics, and have the knowledge necessary to utilize these tools to augment their own ability.

Getting into a Bachelor's degree or higher I think it would be necessary to start having a much more solid understanding of each topic of study.

Detractors would rightly say 'well what If the technology becomes unavailable via a storm/blackout or the internet is knocked out, or somehow otherwise becomes inaccessible' and I think that in our modern world if that happens everything is so integrated into technology that it'll grind to a halt regardless.

Another good point is that ChatGPT is still an early product. I don't advocate using it professionally in most fields at this point in time unless it's the topic of study. However, very shortly I believe the census will change. In the past two years progress has been mind-boggling.

Everything is reliant on computation in modern society, why not augment ourselves? I can honestly say that the vast majority of math I learned in HS I've never done again, and I work with a ton of data.. it's all done and calculated via software, and verified with a calculator, which is done mostly by programmers with tools of their own. (Though I admit this needs to be looked at, 41.32% of professional programmers had a Bachelor's degree and only 21% had a Master's degree (according to 'Statista' poll data from 2022))

I have several friends that work in corporate finance and while having a drink on my back patio over the past summer they had stated that they very rarely use anything beyond basic math, the rest is done for them by machines.

Or perhaps we need to rethink what High School is meant to teach. It seems our public education system, and way of teaching is stuck in the early 1900s while we've progressed tremendously. Though I admit, as my grandfather used to say, it's easier said than done.

Edited to add Statista poll, Link

5

notarobot4932 t1_j32nhmq wrote

That was the way they did it, so now it's the way you have to do it. 😂

1

27and26 t1_j30ba3g wrote

Yeah, I really miss leading had tile even I took a few minutes to read through it and it was just click bait at its finest.

3

johnnyheavens t1_j306g4d wrote

You simply added details but headline tracks with what you’re saying. Of course city is t blocking its use within City limits because that wouldn’t even work

−10

Brilliant_War4087 t1_j2zmrkw wrote

It's smarter than me in the subjects I'm studying, probably smarter than my professors. I'm going to use it.

Imagine banning tutors because they're sometimes wrong.

64

Ortus14 t1_j2zqlye wrote

Imagine banning eyeballs because vision is sometimes wrong.

Or banning the use of legs because sometimes people trip.

21

Think_Olive_1000 t1_j310sbm wrote

Isn't the ban partially because they don't want students to miss out on actually doing the work themselves? Using AI is kinda like going to the gym and then getting hal9000 to lift 90% of any weight you're told to pick up.

3

VirtualEndlessWill t1_j31p0mw wrote

Why use a smartphone for navigation when you can use a paper map, right?

It’s time that we let go of hindrances and embrace the technology that helps humans. If an AI can write a draft essay about a topic then I would like to use it for saving time. You eventually have to understand the topic and likely learn it by simply reviewing and adjusting the product. It’s much better than crawling through search engines and books for days.

4

Think_Olive_1000 t1_j328kga wrote

your ability to use google maps effectively correlates pretty well with how well you understand paper maps. things like logitude, latitude, being able to read the legend, being able to understand what contour lines mean. If we teach students to be lazy and not understand these things then they won't even know how to prompt an ai effectively into doing what they want. Not to mention they'd be left completely helpless in situations where being able to read a map is vital - like if they're abroad and they have no internet access (offline map only, no guidance), which is not uncommon. Ofcourse, you might never encounter that situation if you're a lardy american.

1

VirtualEndlessWill t1_j3342do wrote

Actually, I really have no clue about this topic (professional education, the proper training of people into junior experts of a field), so it's hard to bring up any more points. I've never grown up or used ai for studying myself so maybe your point is correct. There's definitely a big risk of using (or abusing) ai because it can promote reliance on ai.

My point would be that this reliance is the way of the future (just like smartphones and apps) and certain people will still try to understand more about this topic and therefore educate themselves, but then that's the idea behind education.

So yeah, maybe the rational consensus is limiting the amount of AI used in education that is designed for developing real expertise, but allowing AI to assist people in everyday life.

1

voyaging t1_j30e83p wrote

in what field(s) is it smarter than your professors?

6

Think_Olive_1000 t1_j310ojz wrote

None - the only difference is that it is one on one so it feels like that to the user. Education in a lot of places is broken because of class size.

2

Brilliant_War4087 t1_j31g1qu wrote

He could be right. It might feel that way due to time management and how long email correspondence takes to answer a questions.

I used it at the end of my college algebra class last semester. It was definitely better than the book/webassign and the supplemental math class I had to go to for the class. I ended up using it to finish a essay on endosymbiotic theory for bio and on my last couple math assignments and the exams. I got over 90% on all of them and I didn't "cheat."

Overall as a tool, it will make my life allot easier. The fact that I won't have to learn a knew platform every semester for math will speed up the learning process in itself.

We'll see, I start class again on Monday. I'll be using it for precalc, chemistry 1 and medical ethics. I predict I'll get straight A's and have more time to self study due to it improving my work flow.

1

Ortus14 t1_j2zpi97 wrote

They use to ban calculators as well.

These kids are not being trained for our future.

56

LoquaciousAntipodean t1_j302t1j wrote

Exactly! Agreed so damn hard it hurts. "Training provider" has become such a scammy, useless, hollowed out shell of an economic sector; they are all but obsolete and worse, the smartest of them know it.

So they stalk the battlefields of this great and stupid culture war between conservatives and optimists, spitefully and fearfully sniping, sneering and stabbing at anything they see as 'intruding' upon their rapidly shrinking, drying-out little walled gardens of privilege and unearned respect...

10

V_Shtrum t1_j349oft wrote

In school maths exams in the UK: you usually have one exam where you're allowed a calculator, and one without. Maybe there should be something similar in education and AI: learn how to use it, and how not to use it?

2

Frumpagumpus t1_j2zs7yb wrote

education system quaking in its boots

30

LoquaciousAntipodean t1_j303zkc wrote

Good! To quote Butterfingers, and the great Evil Eddie, in their track 'F.I.G.J.A.M':

"*if you are getting very sleepy, Wake Up! Haha, these cucks need a shake up!

Imma jetsetter, gogetter, but I gotta deaththreatta, over the phone!

Betta go lay low underground like a bilby... Chill man, people wanna kill me!

But I don' let that bull$hit sweat me, I'm atcha mum's if ya wanna come and 'get' me,

Ya shady f&k, I maybe stuck, in a crazy situation, but I'm favoured by lady luck!

You wanna stop me? Ya oughta do it properly! //Bang, bang!// Ah f&k! Somebody shot me!*"

🤣🤪

−2

xITmasterx t1_j31ba8t wrote

What in the living heck was this?

Can any mod remove this?

2

LoquaciousAntipodean t1_j31cnlo wrote

I can remove it if you really want. Why, don't you like it? "Bro?" Do you consider it offensive? I'm honestly fascinated by what your reasoning might be 🧐🤔

Edit: perhaps I'm testing you, to see if you're a bot... Spooky music plays do you feel self-aware, u/xlTmasterx?

1

LoquaciousAntipodean t1_j30kmh3 wrote

Wow, you precious little American snowflakes really don't like the coarse word for female sex organs, do ya? Why is it so much worse than words for male sex organs, to you lot over there? That sort of puritan crap seems a bit bloody uptight and misogynist to me, but I'm Australian, so I guess that makes me insane by definition. You know, since my country doesn't fking exist, according to you silly memelord c&nts... ;)

−1

LoquaciousAntipodean t1_j31h3df wrote

Hehehe, there we go. I knew it was that word. Why so touchy, you crazy puritanical Yankees? Are y'alls r@cist against Australians too, then?

2

CandyCoatedHrtShapes t1_j30dcq3 wrote

The genie is out of the bottle and it’s not going back in.

14

SurroundSwimming3494 t1_j30j7fe wrote

I've seen this comment a lot lately on this sub and it strikes me as some sort of justification to not even attempt to regulate/set boundaries around new technology.

2

zendonium t1_j30uors wrote

I think it's from people who've been warning about what's coming for some time. Nobody has listened and so they're delighting in the chaos that AI will bring.

7

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2zdngp wrote

Yet people thought I was silly for predicting that liberals are emerging neo-Luddites.

11

eJaguar t1_j306cbl wrote

lmao i guarantee you this is an 'old person thing', but please continue to shoe-horn in random political labels in places that aren't applicable

8

voyaging t1_j30ej2j wrote

Probably more of an anti-cheating thing

Dunno how the fuck it would stop anyone tho

4

TinyBurbz t1_j2zjtfd wrote

>Homework is a liberal plot

>
>- PhilosophusFuturum 2023

3

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2zo37g wrote

I said nothing about homework; just that backlash against emerging technology in favor of antiquated social systems will increasingly become more of a liberal phenomenon.

5

TinyBurbz t1_j2zqjeq wrote

>backlash against emerging technology in favor of antiquated social systems will increasingly become more of a liberal phenomenon.

Stay in school, kid.

−5

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2zqkyx wrote

I am 25 and have finished my bachelor’s a while ago. Going onto Masters right now.

4

TinyBurbz t1_j2zs472 wrote

Get a refund.

−6

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2ztx05 wrote

I am trying to get one from your mom because she can’t perform in bed

6

xeneks t1_j2zx1e9 wrote

I definitely need to ask A/S/L on you two because I'm missing out. Actually, that's something I didn't yet ask chatGPT. BRB.

3

TinyBurbz t1_j2zwscg wrote

It's not her fault your penis is too small to be felt.

−2

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2zx1bs wrote

No your mom’s pussy is just to cavernous from giving birth to your fat ass. I paid for sex but I went spelunking instead 💀

5

FunnyButSad t1_j2zsvw6 wrote

Lol. "Backlash against emerging technology", i.e. wanting to CONSERVE the status quo?I wonder, is this progressive? Or is it conservative?

Can't wait to hear more from him.

3

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2zut8b wrote

I’m not saying that it’s only progressives doing this, just that it’s also a growing tendency among them. It’s obviously worse among conservatives and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future.

Progressives are beginning to shift more anti-technological progress because of the fact that aging-millennials are a major foundation of the American progressive movement, and the fact that many far-left people have a general sense of cynicism regarding technological advancement because its perpetuated by major corporations, often to fulfill their own corporate interests (this one is justified).

5

Gotisdabest t1_j30iiyy wrote

I think you're missing the forest for the trees. The fact is that this is an upcoming major and massive change to more or less every section of society. It's going to get flak from every single side imagineable. Not by virtue of their political beliefs but by sheer virtue of the fear of the unknown. Rather than labels i think the focus should currently be on action as a very different kind of binary or trinary emerges.

I agree with the last fear and i think that people should be pro active in preparing for this politically and socially, and it's a pity so little of that's being done.

1

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j30j6au wrote

Yeah I agree with that and have written extensively about it. Everyone draws a line of the amount of technological progress they consider to be acceptable. Conservatives tend to draw that line very early on. As progress is accelerating, we are now crossing the lines drawn by progressive people. My point isn’t about politics, but that we are now beginning to face resistance from people we traditionally haven’t had issues with.

2

Gotisdabest t1_j30kku0 wrote

Is that really true though? A large section of the relative left or progressive faction has been opposing specific types of tech for centuries at this point. Union protests against more automation have been a long long part of history and green anti-nuclear beliefs are common.

What i do think is happening is that we are having a lot more hue and cry this time since, well, it's a lot bigger now. To add on this is a field that's not very popular yet in the media as compared to just regular politics, so understanding is low and the general impression is just a creeping dread. And traditionally, everyone is afraid of something that poses a real risk to them. Instead of a line being crossed, it's more like people just think that they are under threat.

It's come out a lot more due to the primarily leftist art community being the first to see some massive immediate threat. I imagine it'll tilt the other side when it's some typically right wing jobs being automated.

It's moreso that these are now being amplified due to the large amount of debate and discussion rather than particular lines being crossed.

0

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j30m0qy wrote

Yeah technological advancements in the modern day are often used by Liberals and Conservatives in the culture war. Right now, Liberals are being clowned on because of AI Art replacing Twitter artists. A year ago it was conservatives being clowned because of the NFT and Crypto market collapse.

In regards to the AI art thing; I think the backlash has a lot more to do with whose problem it is instead of the fact that it’s someone’s problem. Artists are the ones who are feeling the burn because of AI art, and they’re creative people who can draw well. So this means that they are able to effectively propagandize large swathes of people against AI art for their own self interest. To date; we have never attempted to automate the work of people who were able to win this much support for their cause without any outside help.

2

Gotisdabest t1_j30niua wrote

>In regards to the AI art thing; I think the backlash has a lot more to do with whose problem it is instead of the fact that it’s someone’s problem.

For sure. I was speaking more in terms of why there seems to be a rise in left wing anti ai voices, so to speak. It's mostly because of ai "coming after" a heavily left wing and very vocal community.

>A year ago it was conservatives being clowned because of the NFT and Crypto market collapse.

And in another year it'll likely be truck drivers who'd be angry.

2

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j30pb2h wrote

As a guy who worked in Trucking; we have been working on self driving trucks for a while. The consensus among developers of SD trucks and truckers themselves is that the field will eventually be automated and likely soon. But we probably still have at least a decade because 1) we don’t have FSD cars yet and safety is priority with massive trucks, and 2) actual driving is only half the job.

2

Gotisdabest t1_j30pied wrote

We do actually have FSD trucks working some short routes for Walmart, iirc. And we kinda do have some FSD cars. They're still undergoing testing, ofc, but it's mostly on open streets. Mercedes has level 3 models out already by German standards and Kia looks primed for it.

2

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j30q3kd wrote

Yeah I would know I helped test a few (but not for Walmart). I think they’re looking really good so far. I do think they will compose the majority of newly sold lories by 2030. But the main issues facing them are legal liability, inflexibility for LTL roots or smaller roots. Load management, logistics, load accountability, highway robbery, etc.

I think a lot of these issues could be fixed with a person who rides the lorey and does these tasks. And that’s what Walmart and other companies who are testing these are doing. But we are still a few years off from this being a viable means to control the majority of the American trucking industry.

Don’t tell kids to become truckers though.

2

Gotisdabest t1_j30uexe wrote

I do think legal liability will fade reasonably quickly once certain safety standards are met. Not that they won't still happen it'll just be far better for everyone involved to figure out a framework. Highway robbery is an issue but i also don't see it really blocking change since it's certainly not equal to the value of not hiring a driver. I have no knowledge of the logistics or load management but surely they too can be managed reasonably quickly with some traning.

I do value your experience on this topic and find your concerns legitmate, but i also think that the change will come far quicker than expected just because of lucrative it is for everyone, and how other countries adopting it would lead to a rush everywhere else to not miss out on the productivity boost. A dramatically reduced salary and benefits structure along with more extensive and flexible driving times is just too powerful to ignore once the tech is proven.

2

TinyBurbz t1_j2zxpha wrote

>because of the fact that aging-millennials are a major foundation of the American progressive movement

>
>I'm 25

Bro, you missed the cut off by like two years; you dont get to call millennials "aging" when you are getting your first grey hairs yourself.

What are you gonna do in four years when you are "aging" lmao.

−2

PhilosophusFuturum t1_j2zy1vw wrote

That’s the very young-end of the millennial generation. Millennials are as old as 41 right now. The average millennial is in their 30’s. That’s not old, but it’s at the point where people generally start families, build lives, and begin favoring stability over change.

5

TinyBurbz t1_j3015xj wrote

Like I said, get a refund on that education.

0

drekmonger t1_j30dkvb wrote

I've noticed a strong backlash against AI technology in leftist enclaves I frequent, and it's not just the older generations either, but the younger.

Accurately, they predict that AI will primarily serve commercial interests, and that the progression of the technology will make the rich richer. Currently, their arguments are mostly centered around art generation tools from greedy corporations "stealing" from poor artists.

3

voyaging t1_j30fc57 wrote

Pretty horrifically bad argument with a very plausible conclusion.

3

TinyBurbz t1_j32o4pm wrote

Almost like those leftist spaces are realistically informed on this technology. They know damn well that GPT and Diffusion just means elimination of skilled labor.

This is not the loom, they are not luddites. The loom let us hire and create more weavers. This technology however, eliminates labor.

1

drekmonger t1_j32p7ua wrote

> They know damn well that GPT and Diffusion just means elimination of skilled labor.

It's true. I don't deny that at all.

I also think there's absolutely no way to stop it. We need to move forward with the idea that AI is here and is going to improve in leaps, and try to figure out how we can reshape society to benefit.

Because it's happening. Even if we somehow outlaw it in the western world, the Chinese will just keep on trucking.

2

TinyBurbz t1_j32rb0h wrote

> Even if we somehow outlaw it in the western world, the Chinese will just keep on trucking.

China has done far more to regulate AI than the US already.

1

drekmonger t1_j32tdu3 wrote

If your idea is to regulate away AI, then you're in for a bad time.

This is a new epoch of human existence. Plan for it happening, instead of fruitlessly trying to fight against the inevitable.

2

TinyBurbz t1_j32vrdi wrote

>Plan for it happening, instead of fruitlessly trying to fight against the inevitable

UghLook, I am not worried about the future of AI driven ads and Disney+ content Ill never watch. I look forward to enhanced google searches, and the various graphic tools being developed by NVIDIA.

However, I can scant see the benefit to everyday people visible AI technology will provide. Aside from enhanced ad delivery? Wow

1

AethericEye t1_j30dot6 wrote

I've been using it to help with lesson planning lol

Not for factual information, but for the linearization of complex concepts and for generating interesting prompts.

11

W1nt3rrav3n t1_j30zhtq wrote

Yes, instead of align, accept the speed of technology and see that as a potential, let's bann it.

What comes next? Wiki? Google?

Isaac Asimov was right, when he said: “The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.”

9

Deonhollins58ucla t1_j31m3kj wrote

Problem is you need wisdom to use knowledge accurately and effectively. Better to ban the technology, learn about it, and create ways so that it doesn’t disrupt the status quo, then release it it. That’s better than just jumping in the high end and hoping you can swim

−1

W1nt3rrav3n t1_j3357w0 wrote

Especially because humanity is able to think exponentially or collect wisdom fast. There are no differences between the cultures.... right?

Ever wondered why we have politicians to do the job? Why we're not asking each and every citizen on his opinion?

For example: We're able to extend the human life for like 50%, recreate conscious in virtual word, fix some of diseases already in uterus using gene treatment.

Should we stop until we're wise enough?

I think the best approach is to go wit Utilitarianism.

3

Deonhollins58ucla t1_j33fj10 wrote

“For example: We're able to extend the human life for like 50%, recreate conscious in virtual word, fix some of diseases already in uterus using gene treatment.Should we stop until we're wise enough?”

Yes we should lol. That’s why the term “trial” exists. It’s stupid to put all your eggs in one basket without knowing the adverse effects.

1

rushmc1 t1_j2zq3y5 wrote

THAT always works so well...

3

Demosthenes-storming t1_j304rpj wrote

Lol, how incredibly short sighted can you be? Don't use electric light to study, it gives an unfair advantage!

3

pipe2057 t1_j30iirx wrote

Lets get an A+... ChatGPT thank you so much for doing my essay lol)

3

gthing t1_j3160cy wrote

Whoever isn’t working with ai will be capable of a fraction of what people can do who embrace it.

3

darklinux1977 t1_j2zsr2f wrote

It's normal, the students must learn by themselves

2

colarocker t1_j30wn0u wrote

That sounds kinda stupid. Like, before you can mow the lawn you have to learn it using only your hands.

4

darklinux1977 t1_j34quqg wrote

I agree , but , AI , in education : no . We all see, it's about five minutes on Facebook and/or Twitter, to see that the grade level, collapses, but if you add the ChatGPT crutch, you put the educational process in cold storage, because of its blatant uselessness and these engineers, these thinkers, these creators that we need, will not exist, because there will be no more education, this one is not only for math, history, geography, but to create independent citizens, not consumers

1

t98907 t1_j30urrr wrote

Considering the accuracy of the answers provided by the current ChatGPT, it may be justified to forbid the current ChatGPT for younger ages. However, as they get older, they may need to be taught how to deal with it.

2

crua9 t1_j30q77e wrote

The law bans people from pot but people still smoke.

1

SmoothPlastic9 t1_j31dwpg wrote

Start reading the article instead of the title guys

1

xB_I-O_S t1_j31i9jo wrote

Ah the good old let‘s ban it instead of teaching the risks and advantages of new technology

1

axii69 t1_j31pim8 wrote

NYC wants to keep their population dumb. Hence why NYC is becoming more and more of a shithole by the day sadly

1

ziplock9000 t1_j31rt4d wrote

No it has fucking not.

It's banned using it from educational networks.

Clickbait title

1

thedarklord176 t1_j323u10 wrote

Fuck them. Most of American school is useless garbage. Students have the right to use something like this if they’re going to be forced to waste time.

1

notarobot4932 t1_j32nae8 wrote

I have a great idea. Let's ban pencils and calculators too instead of updating our curriculum to account for increased educational productivity. But nah, let's just ban it.

1

ghostfuckbuddy t1_j34ahxt wrote

This seems ineffective because there are too many workarounds. For example, just using ChatGPT on your smartphone. I think there would a lot more fear around cheating with ChatGPT if teachers scanned all submissions with AI-detection tools. That would skew the risk/reward tradeoff towards not cheating with AI.

1

Akimbo333 t1_j30i62p wrote

NYC is so damn foolish lol!!!

0