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

Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 168 posts

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#71

Post by Natfan »

yamillove wrote: post #53
phist_mcgee wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an odd world view. Of course the priviliged have greater social obligations, because they are greater benefactors of life. We're all equal under the law but that doesn't mean that those with greater means shouldn't have greater impacts on society. Meritocracy is often a buzzword of the elite to avoid paying their fair share.

[flagged]

also the rich absolutely _do_ owe society at large something: taxes. a thing which, as you get richer, it apparently becomes optional due to financial engineering

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#72

Post by SturgeonsLaw »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #46
piloto_ciego wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing you're angry at, the thing that you're upset about? It's capitalism, it's the coupling of education with jobs, it's credentialism being overturned by new technology, etc. I think education is incredibly important, but I understand that I'm going to have to retrain myself a little bit. A college degree can no-longer be assumed to be a proxy for having put in the effort to deeply study something. Now what's t…

replying to my own thread here, but this got me thinking, so thanks OP, but... can anyone here think of some better ways where we could decouple the education process from the work process? To me this seems like the main problem. It seems that we've decided that "get good grades == good employee" collectively. I know I'm a bad employee (which is why I work for myself now but that's another story), but I got great gra…

Make education free. I'd love to study something like philosophy or art history but there's just no return on that investment. Unless you're already wealthy, it doesn't make sense to drop five or six figures on a degree unless it's likely to pay for itself.

Which is even becoming less likely with STEM, as we hit a confluence of higher education costs, fewer job openings, and AI as a competitor for work.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#73

Post by OutOfHere »

It's laughable to be surprised by cheating on take-home exams. Does the professor have a comparative assessment before AI? Do you think the cheating didn't happen on them before AI? It always happened. It's structural, in the same ways that speeding on the highway is structural, and evading taxes on cash income is structural. And the structural fix is in-class exams.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#74

Post by asdfasvea »

MarsIronPI wrote: post #57
mattas wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why bother learning anything when you can just use AI?

So you can call out the AI's mistakes. Everyone seems to be saying that AI is really good, except at their particular field. Make of that what you will.

But here's the thing, AI will be the source of truth soon. For many it already is.

The dumber we (humanity in general) get, the smarter AI appears to the average person. You'll be a heretic or just deemed crazy if you call BS on something AI says in 50 years--regardless.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#75

Post by roshin »

avaer wrote: post #16

Seems like an application of Goodhart's law; measuring worth by degree or grades stopped measuring learning or ability. This was a lot harder to cheat before AI, but now the floodgates are open and grades and degrees earned post-AI are showing that they mean little. Cheating on college tests should be a jailable criminal offense (similar to computer fraud) so that there is dignity in the degree again. Considering the…

Ideas like cheating on a college test should be jailable is why the US leads in number of jailed people

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#76

Post by piloto_ciego »

SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #72
piloto_ciego wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

replying to my own thread here, but this got me thinking, so thanks OP, but... can anyone here think of some better ways where we could decouple the education process from the work process? To me this seems like the main problem. It seems that we've decided that "get good grades == good employee" collectively. I know I'm a bad employee (which is why I work for myself now but that's another story), but I got great gra…

Make education free. I'd love to study something like philosophy or art history but there's just no return on that investment. Unless you're already wealthy, it doesn't make sense to drop five or six figures on a degree unless it's likely to pay for itself. Which is even becoming less likely with STEM, as we hit a confluence of higher education costs, fewer job openings, and AI as a competitor for work.

I totally agree! And I think you're right! Education should be free.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#77

Post by piloto_ciego »

archagon wrote: post #68
piloto_ciego wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, and this is my "hot take of the decade" but I think we're going to get some sort of AI modulated/managed form of capitalism that will approach socialism in some regards but still allow for people to try to "get rich" or whatever. What that's going to look like I couldn't begin to imagine, but I think you might onto something about the AI industry not being all that capitalistic presently. Not an economist,…

Fascism is the more likely outcome.

Over my (and many other's) dead body. Don't be so cynical.

edit to add:

I feel like a lot about this negative "ermagerd fascism is imminent" stuff is poisoning the well of discourse. Is it a threat? Yup. Can I envision a scenario where the bad guys win and I get "the wall" after my LLM moderated kangaroo court? Totally. Do I think that's very likely? No. And I think the immediate appeal to "doooooom!" is a thought killing cliche at this point.

You know what we should be doing? We should be figuring out how to create a new system that reflects the realities of the modern world. We should be actively designing new ways of arranging society that makes the world a better place for all. Like, go read about FALC, or read Bookchin or something. But these fear based pithy appeals to doom lead nowhere.

The fascists are real - I recognize that, but let's figure out how to build something better!

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#78

Post by palmotea »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #54
overgard wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I think there are a lot of problems created by capitalism right now, I would argue that nothing about the current AI industry is actually capitalist at all. These are companies that are surviving despite absolutely bleeding cash because the ultra-rich have decided that things would be so much more convenient for them if they didn't need to deal with employees anymore. This isn't "well, people are doing this bec…

Honestly, and this is my "hot take of the decade" but I think we're going to get some sort of AI modulated/managed form of capitalism that will approach socialism in some regards but still allow for people to try to "get rich" or whatever. What that's going to look like I couldn't begin to imagine, but I think you might onto something about the AI industry not being all that capitalistic presently. Not an economist,…

> Honestly, and this is my "hot take of the decade" but I think we're going to get some sort of AI modulated/managed form of capitalism that will approach socialism in some regards but still allow for people to try to "get rich" or whatever.

That's optimistic. IMHO, it's more likely the libertarian tech-lords make sure we get some kind of hyper-capitalism, where you're either rich or bone-crushingly poor.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#79

Post by piloto_ciego »

binary132 wrote: post #69
overgard wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I think there are a lot of problems created by capitalism right now, I would argue that nothing about the current AI industry is actually capitalist at all. These are companies that are surviving despite absolutely bleeding cash because the ultra-rich have decided that things would be so much more convenient for them if they didn't need to deal with employees anymore. This isn't "well, people are doing this bec…

Uh, they are doing that because they think one of them is going to build the monopoly that will rule the rest of the future approximately forever.

Maybe? But I cannot see that as a stable end state. I think we'll get some sort of weird managed capitalism for exactly that reason.

I actually don't really want that sort of outcome, I'd like to see some sort of libertarian socialism arise out of post-scarcity? But what that looks like? I don't know. 20 year old me would have had lots of ideas about how we "ought to be" but now, pushing 40? I am less certain of the things I "know."

Regardless, I don't see the really bad guys winning this one...

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#80

Post by piloto_ciego »

palmotea wrote: post #78
piloto_ciego wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, and this is my "hot take of the decade" but I think we're going to get some sort of AI modulated/managed form of capitalism that will approach socialism in some regards but still allow for people to try to "get rich" or whatever. What that's going to look like I couldn't begin to imagine, but I think you might onto something about the AI industry not being all that capitalistic presently. Not an economist,…

> Honestly, and this is my "hot take of the decade" but I think we're going to get some sort of AI modulated/managed form of capitalism that will approach socialism in some regards but still allow for people to try to "get rich" or whatever. That's optimistic. IMHO, it's more likely the libertarian tech-lords make sure we get some kind of hyper-capitalism, where you're either rich or bone-crushingly poor.

I get that doom sense, but... I can't really see it happening because... well, people that have never truly been hungry are already frantically clacking at their keyboards with the slogan of "eat the rich!"

I don't know what we get? But if this is the rhetoric now, how many Luigis would we expect to see as things got really bad, and the vision you paint is really bad.

Post reply on HN