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

It Wasn't AI

itwasntai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 134 posts

Re: It Wasn't AI

#111

Post by cwkoss »

dv_dt wrote: post #59
aripickar wrote: post #12

IMO one of the way that most schools are going to end up being able to detect plagiarism is going to be a custom word processor (or something similar) that can track all of the edits made into a document. Basically, have the students type an essay where all of the keystrokes are recorded by the program, and so it can be detected by the program whether someone is copy and pasting whole essays, or if someone is actuall…

As a parent whose student has worked with multiple essay entry editors/forms, they're almost all terrible with most students having to revert to writing the essay outside the system or risk losing their work multiple times. And this was with a simple editor - not more complex connections to even more sophisticated systems. The budget available for educational technology is not sufficient to maintain the operation of…

Yeah, then you get a bunch of non-cheating students who are intelligent and just annoyed with the text editor will use cheating tools to insert their essay they wrote in a proper word processor - further poisoning the dataset.

Re: It Wasn't AI

#112

Post by cwkoss »

Teachers need to ask students to write things that are hard for AI to cheat on: if a bunch of humans end up writing very similar essays to the prompt - that's a prompt problem!

Re: It Wasn't AI

#113

Post by jkaptur »

chongli wrote: post #77
rorroe53 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why should educational instutions care? Education is a business, students are the customers (or in countries with state-funded education, the government). If AI helps people graduate faster, that's more money to the institutions, less effort to the students, and nice statistics for the governments. At least in my country most degrees aren't worth much anyway, they just open you doors to internships where you real…

Because educational institutions aren’t in the business of selling education: they give that away for free. Seriously, walk into any university campus and into a lecture hall, sit down and take notes. No one will stop you! No one will check ID. You can even talk to the professor and 99% of the time they’ll give you access to the course materials online at well. What students are paying for is accreditation. It’s not…

True most of the time, but interestingly enough, this is not the case in China (even pre-COVID). The Tsinghua University gate had serious guards - you absolutely could not proceed onto campus without the proper authorization.

Re: It Wasn't AI

#114

Post by dahwolf »

refulgentis wrote: post #110
dahwolf wrote: post #87

To prove authenticity, be politically incorrect in a way AI never would. You'll be dismissed, canceled and fired, but at least authentically so.

What is up with these snowflake neues, posting bitter over-the-top political comments? They stick out like a sore thumb in spring 2023. It flew under the radar more when everyone was short-tempered, say winter 2021. The people who are still stuck on it and in their own heads seem to have a __negative__ herding effect. There's a seed of irrationality that drives some, and as there's fewer, they stick out more, making…

What's up with catastrophizing an obvious joke?

See, if you'd intellectually engage in good faith, you'd understand the point that one of few (if not the only) reliable ways to tell apart AI from humans in the future would be human shortcomings.

A misguided offense extrapolated into pseudo-intellectual tone policing is a beautiful example of that, so you pass.

Re: It Wasn't AI

#115

Post by shortj »

wizofaus wrote: post #95
shortj wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny enough, one fo the first things I did with ChatGPT was teach it how to write with charcater keyboard transpositions and subtle typos so people wouldn't think varioius text was AI generated. Works pretty well. (Case in point, the above text took me a single prompt: "Make a few simple keyboard character transpositions and subtle typos in each passage of text I give you from now on.")

Still, I doubt an LLM would ever start a sentence with "Funny enough" (the normal usage is "Funnily enough" but even that doesn't seem like something the current crop of AIs would use without explicit prompting).

Nice catch and very good point. The model actually tried to fix this in a couple cases, but not all, when I was playing with it to see how else it would typo.

Re: It Wasn't AI

#116

Post by jasmer »

akiselev wrote: post #82
chongli wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because educational institutions aren’t in the business of selling education: they give that away for free. Seriously, walk into any university campus and into a lecture hall, sit down and take notes. No one will stop you! No one will check ID. You can even talk to the professor and 99% of the time they’ll give you access to the course materials online at well. What students are paying for is accreditation. It’s not…

> Because educational institutions aren’t in the business of selling education: they give that away for free. Seriously, walk into any university campus and into a lecture hall, sit down and take notes. No one will stop you! No one will check ID. You can even talk to the professor and 99% of the time they’ll give you access to the course materials online at well. Can confirm. When I was a senior in high school, a pro…

That's fine though, and it's exactly how we would want it to be aka it's for the students but if someone is ernest they can just 'participate' in some thing. That's a positive outcome I can't fathom getting upset by that.

That said, showing up for a class isn't exactly 'an education' either.

Re: It Wasn't AI

#117

Post by Balgair »

I love this AI cheating detection stuff.

Mostly because it really gets at the root of the issues in education.

Like, fine, you have made some system where cheating is impossible. Great.

But have your students learned anything?

If educators put in even a iota of effort into learning their students, then they know who is cheating and who isn't.

But if they put that same amount back into teaching, then everyone wins.

Education is not a contest with winner and losers.

(Yes, ok, you went to a bad school where it was a contest for your pre-med degree. Look where that has gotten US healthcare.)

Re: It Wasn't AI

#118

Post by [deleted] »

dahwolf wrote: post #114
refulgentis wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is up with these snowflake neues, posting bitter over-the-top political comments? They stick out like a sore thumb in spring 2023. It flew under the radar more when everyone was short-tempered, say winter 2021. The people who are still stuck on it and in their own heads seem to have a __negative__ herding effect. There's a seed of irrationality that drives some, and as there's fewer, they stick out more, making…

What's up with catastrophizing an obvious joke? See, if you'd intellectually engage in good faith, you'd understand the point that one of few (if not the only) reliable ways to tell apart AI from humans in the future would be human shortcomings. A misguided offense extrapolated into pseudo-intellectual tone policing is a beautiful example of that, so you pass.

[deleted]

Re: It Wasn't AI

#120

Post by ShamelessC »

swyx wrote: post #94
simonw wrote: post #5

On the one hand, this is sorely needed: AI detection software will inevitably be mostly snake oil. Academia and education desperately wants this software to work! As a result, selling them something that doesn't work is going to be very profitable. The most obvious problem with this class of software is how easy it would be to defeat if the students could access it themselves: generate some text, run it through the d…

this is exactly why i was stunned that someone apparently gave 3m to GPT-zero despite all its known flaws https://www.forbes.com/sites/rashishrivastava/2023/05/09/wit... its too easy to be negative about things in hype cycles and retroactively look back and go "see! i was right! this was a terrible idea!" but.. this is a terrible idea to ai detection fans: show us on an information theory basis how you will smuggle i…

Such a bad choice of name too. Ripe for litigation.
Post reply on HN