Microblog Memes

A good use I've seen for AI (or particularly ChatGPT) is employee reviews and awards (military). A lot of my coworkers (and subordinates) have used it, and it's generally a good way to fluff up the wording for people who don't write fluffy things for a living (we work on helicopters, our writing is very technical, specific, and generally with a pre-established template).

I prefer reading the specifics and can fill out the fluff myself, but higher-ups tend to want "how it benefitted the service" and fitting in the terminology from the rubric.

I don't use it because I'm good at writing that stuff. Not because it's my job, but because I've always been into writing. I don't expect every mechanic to do the same, though, so having things like ChatGPT can make an otherwise onerous (albeit necessary) task more palatable.

My hot take on students graduating college using AI is this: if a subject can be passed using ChatGPT, then it's a trash subject. If a whole course can be passed using ChatGPT, then it's a trash course.

It's not that difficult to put together a course that cannot be completed using AI. All you need is to give a sh!t about the subject you're teaching. What if the teacher, instead of assignments, had everyone sit down at the end of the semester in a room, and had them put together the essay on the spot, based on what they've learned so far? No phones, no internet, just the paper, pencil, and you. Those using ChatGPT will never pass that course.

As damaging as AI can be, I think it also exposes a lot of systemic issues with education. Students feeling the need to complete assignments using AI could do so for a number of reasons:

• students feel like the task is pointless busywork, in which case a) they are correct, or b) the teacher did not properly explain the task's benefit to them.

• students just aren't interested in learning, either because a) the subject is pointless filler (I've been there before), or b) the course is badly designed, to the point where even a rote algorithm can complete it, or c) said students shouldn't be in college in the first place.

Higher education should be a place of learning for those who want to further their knowledge, profession, and so on. However, right now college is treated as this mandatory rite of passage to the world of work for most people. It doesn't matter how meaningless the course, or how little you've actually learned, for many people having a degree is absolutely necessary to find a job. I think that's bullcrap.

If you don't want students graduating with ChatGPT, then design your courses properly, cut the filler from the curriculum, and make sure only those are enrolled who are actually interested in what is being taught.

Well, this just looks like criteria for a financially sucessful person.

Dumb take because inaccuracies and lies are not unique to LLMs.

half of what you’ll learn in medical school will be shown to be either dead wrong or out of date within five years of your graduation.

https://retractionwatch.com/2011/07/11/so-how-often-does-medical-consensus-turn-out-to-be-wrong/ and that's 2011, it's even worse now.

Real studying is knowning that no source is perfect but being able to craft a true picture of the world using the most efficient tools at hand and like it or not, objectively LLMs are pretty good already.

In terms of grade school, essay and projects were of marginal or nil educational value and they won't be missed.

Until the last 20 years, 100% of the grade for medicine was by exams.

This is fair if you're just copy-pasting answers, but what if you use the AI to teach yourself concepts and learn things? There are plenty of ways to avoid hallucinations, data-poisoning and obtain scientifically accurate information from LLMs. Should that be off the table as well?