Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#11

Post by curiousgibbon »

FlyingAvatar wrote: post #4
ChancyChance wrote: post #2

As long as we keep having to ask, "ChatGPT answered this questions but was it right?" it is a nonstarter. It is currently a novelty, not a tool. To be a tool it needs to be reliable.

In most subjects I have found ChatGPT to be fairly reliable. Are there specific scenarios that you have found concerning? I think perfect reliability is not absolutely necessary. None of the human teachers that I have learned from were perfectly reliable even in their area of expertise. Thankfully, skepticism seems to be an innate human trait.

ChatGPT does not get full credit on the homework I create, even when the topic is some standard-ish algorithm with significant presence in the training data. Or maybe I'm just a bad prompt engineer.

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#12

Post by AussieWog93 »

vharuck wrote: post #6
FlyingAvatar wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most subjects I have found ChatGPT to be fairly reliable. Are there specific scenarios that you have found concerning? I think perfect reliability is not absolutely necessary. None of the human teachers that I have learned from were perfectly reliable even in their area of expertise. Thankfully, skepticism seems to be an innate human trait.

Prompt: Cite three important academic journal articles about cybersecurity, including DOI numbers Response: 1. Anderson, R., & Moore, T. (2006). The Economics of Information Security. Science, 314(5799), 610-613. DOI: 10.1126/science.1130992 2. Schneier, B. (2015). Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World. WW Norton & Company. DOI: 10.1080/13600834.2015.1093541 3. Fung, B., & G…

Were you using GPT-3.5 or GPT-4?

Apparently GPT-4 is much more accurate and natural in its responses.

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#14

Post by FlyingAvatar »

curiousgibbon wrote: post #11
FlyingAvatar wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most subjects I have found ChatGPT to be fairly reliable. Are there specific scenarios that you have found concerning? I think perfect reliability is not absolutely necessary. None of the human teachers that I have learned from were perfectly reliable even in their area of expertise. Thankfully, skepticism seems to be an innate human trait.

ChatGPT does not get full credit on the homework I create, even when the topic is some standard-ish algorithm with significant presence in the training data. Or maybe I'm just a bad prompt engineer.

What grade level is the homework you are creating?

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#15

Post by FlyingAvatar »

vharuck wrote: post #6
FlyingAvatar wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most subjects I have found ChatGPT to be fairly reliable. Are there specific scenarios that you have found concerning? I think perfect reliability is not absolutely necessary. None of the human teachers that I have learned from were perfectly reliable even in their area of expertise. Thankfully, skepticism seems to be an innate human trait.

Prompt: Cite three important academic journal articles about cybersecurity, including DOI numbers Response: 1. Anderson, R., & Moore, T. (2006). The Economics of Information Security. Science, 314(5799), 610-613. DOI: 10.1126/science.1130992 2. Schneier, B. (2015). Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World. WW Norton & Company. DOI: 10.1080/13600834.2015.1093541 3. Fung, B., & G…

I guess I see ChatGPT as a very broadly knowledgeable, yet fallible person, not as a database. It would be a very rare person who could come up with the data you asked for off the top of their heads. Granted, it would be much better if it could tell you "I don't know", rather than hallucinate facts.

As far as it being able to explain base concepts in a conversational manner and helping bridge gaps in my own understanding, it has been very helpful to me.

I'm sure there are certain subjects where this will work better than others, but I would guess especially for most K-12 classwork, ChatGPT even with its current warts would be a net gain for many students in helping to increase their understanding just by talking with it.

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#16

Post by FlyingAvatar »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #12
vharuck wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prompt: Cite three important academic journal articles about cybersecurity, including DOI numbers Response: 1. Anderson, R., & Moore, T. (2006). The Economics of Information Security. Science, 314(5799), 610-613. DOI: 10.1126/science.1130992 2. Schneier, B. (2015). Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World. WW Norton & Company. DOI: 10.1080/13600834.2015.1093541 3. Fung, B., & G…

Were you using GPT-3.5 or GPT-4? Apparently GPT-4 is much more accurate and natural in its responses.

At the moment, this will happen in GPT-4 as well.

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#17

Post by FlyingAvatar »

shadowfox wrote: post #5
FlyingAvatar wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most subjects I have found ChatGPT to be fairly reliable. Are there specific scenarios that you have found concerning? I think perfect reliability is not absolutely necessary. None of the human teachers that I have learned from were perfectly reliable even in their area of expertise. Thankfully, skepticism seems to be an innate human trait.

> In most subjects I have found ChatGPT to be fairly reliable. Not the OP, but I am very curious what subjects you have experimented with and whether you used any special prompt techniques. My experience has been quite on the contrary: on the few subjects I have some understanding of, ChatGPT appears to do fine for basic questions and attempts to summarize concepts at a high-level, but any attempt at drilling in to s…

Most of my questioning have been practical questions relating to computer science / programming and language learning (English / Spanish). I have asked a lot of other general knowledge questions, but nothing exceptionally deep.

Can you give more detail as to the hallucinations that you found?

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#18

Post by [deleted] »

FlyingAvatar wrote: post #15
vharuck wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prompt: Cite three important academic journal articles about cybersecurity, including DOI numbers Response: 1. Anderson, R., & Moore, T. (2006). The Economics of Information Security. Science, 314(5799), 610-613. DOI: 10.1126/science.1130992 2. Schneier, B. (2015). Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World. WW Norton & Company. DOI: 10.1080/13600834.2015.1093541 3. Fung, B., & G…

I guess I see ChatGPT as a very broadly knowledgeable, yet fallible person, not as a database. It would be a very rare person who could come up with the data you asked for off the top of their heads. Granted, it would be much better if it could tell you "I don't know", rather than hallucinate facts. As far as it being able to explain base concepts in a conversational manner and helping bridge gaps in my own understan…

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it

#20

Post by ChancyChance »

FlyingAvatar wrote: post #4
ChancyChance wrote: post #2

As long as we keep having to ask, "ChatGPT answered this questions but was it right?" it is a nonstarter. It is currently a novelty, not a tool. To be a tool it needs to be reliable.

In most subjects I have found ChatGPT to be fairly reliable. Are there specific scenarios that you have found concerning? I think perfect reliability is not absolutely necessary. None of the human teachers that I have learned from were perfectly reliable even in their area of expertise. Thankfully, skepticism seems to be an innate human trait.

If you read the news, it is libeling people.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/australian-mayor-readies-...

EDIT: I commented that is often wrong when talking about RF analog circuits or motor control, but this is a rabbit hole. It's like a bad textbook.

Post reply on HN