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

"You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 266 posts

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#61

Post by TheGlav »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #23
linusha wrote: post #5

Has anyone field-tested strategies to fighting allegations like this and would like to share them? Something I remember from a previous discussion around this topic was writing everything in e.g., Google Docs, where there are captured versions every few seconds. The idea being that the version log shows that one did not copy-and-paste larger chunks of the text.

Or even just set up a "computer cam" that films yourself working. Most laptops can handle this pretty effortlessly with their encode blocks.

Yeah, but what if they have a bag of chips, and inside that bag of chips, is a small tablet or phone, in which they ask chat gpt to give them the essay, and then they transcribe it? They might even eat some of those chips to obfuscate that they're getting the information from the bag.

At some level, there has to be some trust, or a system (e.g., in person proctored exams) would have to be used instead.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#62

Post by bluGill »

specproc wrote: post #27
HDThoreaun wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.

I'm assuming this is America? 300 person classes is insane, particular how much debt's involved. I've studied in the UK and EU, and I don't think I've ever been in a class larger than 40.

One someone is standing in front of the room talking it doesn't really matter if there is one person in the room or 1 billion. sure you need a PA system and other technology to support a large crowd, but otherwise it doesn't matter. Most students would prefer to be in a large room with someone who is a great speaker vs a small room with less. If you do have questions - that is what the TA is for and you get to see the TA at least weekly.

Note that the above only applies if the class is supposed to be a lecture. If it is supposed to be interactive then small classes are better. However many of the basic undergrad 1st year courses have been done so often the professor should already answer all possible questions if you keep listening. As you advance that becomes less and less true of course.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#63

Post by sdfghswe »

larvaetron wrote: post #59
sdfghswe wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is. For example, you can make it a game: how can you write in a way that could never be confused with AI? As a bonus, this is almost guaranteed to mean that you'll have a unique style. Writers have been putting challenges to themselves since writing has existed. Minimize number of words, write without using certain letters, etc. It's fun. This person (furry?) just chooses to give up at the slightest obst…

> bro what's the big deal bro just write the paper exactly the way we want you to bro

> bro what's the big deal bro just write the paper exactly the way we want you to bro

Why are talking like that to me? Are you responding to someone else?

I literally cannot comprehend how my suggestion that playing with words might be fun could be interpreted as bro-y.

EDIT: Lol I just skimmed your comment history and it's just garbage like this.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#64

Post by ugh123 »

garciasn wrote: post #9

I am an Eagle Scout and was awarded it in 1995. As part of that process, I had to write up a detailed document outlining my project including how it was conceived, the work, and the outcome. It was rejected on my initial submission because the reviewers felt I it wasn’t written by a sophomore in HS. My parents rewrote the entire thing in what they described as “baby talk” and it was then accepted. The irony is not lo…

I think whats new now is profs and teachers can just turn to a program to "reject at scale" rather than even reading it themselves.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#65

Post by seanoliver »

What is the actual problem with AI generated text in and of itself?

If it was completely AI generated without any human intervention, it likely would have been fairly generic / poor writing anyway. At least for the time being, AI is a new tool at our disposal but it's still just a tool, like a calculator or a hammer.

Students should be judged on the merit of the work even if some of the work is AI generated.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#66

Post by bluGill »

seanoliver wrote: post #58
jonathanstrange wrote: post #55

This is apparently unpopular but my take on this is that if teachers want students to write something on which AI can get high scores, then whatever they're teaching is obsolete and will be replaced by AIs anyway. Of course, not mentioning AI as co-author remains cheating. But I think the best course of action is to simply allow students to use AI while mentioning it (and the prompts they've used). I'm in philosophy…

Not unpopular at all IMO. AI should be (and is) raising the bar all around, both for students and for teachers. This teacher is failing the test.

My boss told me AI isn't quite ready for production yet, but I should expect in just a few years that I'm expected to use an AI for most of my coding tasks. AI can write some very good code, but sometimes it does some "why did you do it that way" things which might or might not be a valid shortcut.

Time will tell.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#67

Post by taylodl »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #29
taylodl wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not handled at the troop level. The Eagle review is at district and council level. It's common for candidates to receive "assistance" to help along the process and the review boards are on the lookout for that.

Sorry, I should have used the correct org terms. But, as the parent of an Eagle scout, I think my point still stands. Either they can, or can't, trust the Eagle to be honest. IMHO, that trust should be a necessary condition for awarding Eagle. And if the council isn't capable of making that call, then they're perhaps unqualified for deciding whether or not to award Eagle rank. (I realize my position is a bit simplist…

Trust but verify. The Scout Law is a set of ideals to which a scout aspires. It's not assumed the Scout has achieved them.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#68

Post by pmarreck »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #4
gustavus wrote: post #3

AI Detection services are the oiliest of snake oils. Seems like education is going to need to change drastically in the next few years. Maybe we'll go all the way back to oral examinations again.

I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.

> I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes

Well that's easy: An AI will administer the oral exam and transcribe the oral answers from each person simultaneously, and possibly even grade it!

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#69

Post by pmarreck »

petemir wrote: post #14
HDThoreaun wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.

Furthermore oral examinations do not scale. We had to do them during covid times and it was gruesome, spending full days in meetings and losing a full week with only 70-80 students.

AI will scale them pretty trivially. I mean, ChatGPT just released verbal back-and-forth tech and is rolling it out, so this is not far off at all.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37768282

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#70

Post by natdempk »

jccalhoun wrote: post #51

As a professor at a community college, I am very hesitant to just declare something is AI generated unless is it very clear. If I suspect something is AI generated I run it through 3 different checkers that I found online and if they don't all agree then I don't call it plagiarism. Normally the writing is so vague that it isn't more than a C anyway.

You shouldn’t be using AI detectors. They aren’t accurate and other approaches to teaching need to be used instead of leaning on old methods: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/8313351-how-can-educator...
Post reply on HN