Texas professor fails entire class from graduating- claiming they used ChatGTP

Post by jdenning » Tue, May 16, 2023, 7:28 PM UTC

shalmanese wrote: post #235

thadt wrote: post #28

The ability to 'cheat' on written assignments has always been a possibility. With the rise of the Internet, it became easier to source it from more places - with a counter balancing rise of plagiarism detectors. Now with Google, Grammarly and ChatGPT, it is trivial to copy/paste a pipeline with enough entropy to defeat many if not most detectors. I suspect the next generation of tools will be finish this cycle - we w…

> If you want someone to produce a piece of writing about something, how they produced it is less important than the result. If it is correct, clear, and gets the job done, then good. No, this fundamentally misunderstands the difference between work and pedagogy. With a work product, the end result is all that matters because it is a fundamentally new contribution for which the contribution is prized. If a marketer c…

Post by malshe » Tue, May 16, 2023, 7:34 PM UTC

chrisfosterelli wrote: post #53

masswerk wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what you get by hyping ChatGPT without making clear what it does, can do, and can not do.

I'm noticing an extremely strong trend of this. It's surprisingly common to see people on twitter use a ChatGPT screenshot as a "source" for statistics or facts that aren't correct.

Post by circuit10 » Tue, May 16, 2023, 7:42 PM UTC

hammyhavoc wrote: post #240

circuit10 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this prove? It proves either that someone trained ChatGPT to spit out this information or that this view is very common on the Internet, which doesn’t necessarily make it right

In the same breath: what does saying it must have a world model prove? Why must it? For every occasion that it can impress with seeming reasoning, there's plenty of times where it just falls down. The more balanced view is that we simply don't know, it's assumption on both sides of the fence—Schrödinger's world model. If something resembling a world model is emergent from the sheer scale of data, perhaps , that's a v…

Post by koonsolo » Tue, May 16, 2023, 8:02 PM UTC

shalmanese wrote: post #235

thadt wrote: post #28

The ability to 'cheat' on written assignments has always been a possibility. With the rise of the Internet, it became easier to source it from more places - with a counter balancing rise of plagiarism detectors. Now with Google, Grammarly and ChatGPT, it is trivial to copy/paste a pipeline with enough entropy to defeat many if not most detectors. I suspect the next generation of tools will be finish this cycle - we w…

> If you want someone to produce a piece of writing about something, how they produced it is less important than the result. If it is correct, clear, and gets the job done, then good. No, this fundamentally misunderstands the difference between work and pedagogy. With a work product, the end result is all that matters because it is a fundamentally new contribution for which the contribution is prized. If a marketer c…

Post by wizofaus » Tue, May 16, 2023, 8:10 PM UTC

hnfong wrote: post #161

AJ007 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people believe horoscopes and astrology carry any meaning? Most will never comprehend LLMs or even the simplest concepts of machine learning.

While we're on the topic of stroking our epeens, do you know how horoscopes and astrology work? Most people here with that condescending attitude will never comprehend it either. FWIW, it's one of the topics I've been trying to understand and come up with a consistent theory for a while. (Not to say those who believe in horoscopes and astrology know how it works though...)