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

141–150 of 168 posts

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

#141

Post by hatradiowigwam »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #37
overgard wrote: post #27

This is already a clusterfuck, but it's going to be so much worse in 10 years. We're going to have an entire generation trapped in the gig economy because their education is going to be considered worthless, and even if it wasn't worthless, there won't be enough entry level jobs for anyone to get into. Senior people will age out and our entire society is just going to be hollowed out. And people wonder why I'm an AI…

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…

> How do we do that in tech? Hell if I know, maybe a proctored written exam, followed by an oral exam, then a project? But who knows.

Ever taken a Redhat exam - such as Red Hat Certified Engineer? That's the right model. It's a hand-on exam with arbitrary exam objectives you have to meet (by any means possible, there is more than one right way to achieve desired state). There is no internet, devices, or anything else to help you. People that pass allow you to make assumptions about them - for example... without stackoverflow, github, or the internet at all - this person can configure virtual hosts with nginx, firewall rules, host VMs, and administer network concepts(virtual switches, routing) between them. To do that without any GUI or internet available - it means you understand those concepts very well, and can implement them blindfolded.

Any RHCEs want to chime in?

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

#142

Post by antisthenes »

lubujackson wrote: post #114
mattas wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why bother learning anything when you can just use AI?

You need to know what to ask and what the answer means. Also, using proper terminology greatly increases LLM accuracy to situate the response in the correct domain. Ask an LLM to "clean up this code applying SOLID principles" is much more prescriptive than "clean up this code".

Exactly.

AI can just give you the details like an encyclopedia article. You still have to know at a high level how something works and which article to look for.

AI is just a more forgiving way to ask something, compared to the searches of the past (e.g. searching a scientific journal database). And (for now at least), AI is a good way to avoid the ad-ridden web.

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

#143

Post by red-iron-pine »

hatradiowigwam wrote: post #141
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…

> How do we do that in tech? Hell if I know, maybe a proctored written exam, followed by an oral exam, then a project? But who knows. Ever taken a Redhat exam - such as Red Hat Certified Engineer? That's the right model. It's a hand-on exam with arbitrary exam objectives you have to meet (by any means possible, there is more than one right way to achieve desired state). There is no internet, devices, or anything else…

you have access to all of the redhat documentation but no internet. if there is a right way to do it as written in the docs then you can often find it.

no internet-style indexing tho, so it's a lot of ctrl-f and hoping you pick the correct chapter -- which can be hard with a timelimit. on stuff I was strong in it was trivial, I'd already seen the docs and knew what to look for but on the few items I wasn't it was a lot of flailing.

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

#144

Post by bmacho »

raddan wrote: post #22
cm2012 wrote: post #2

At-home testing is dead.

It is. I think the professor here was being naive, but I appreciate his optimism. When I was in college (in the 90s), take home exams allowed a knowledgeable student to really shine. I’m not saying that they weren’t eminently cheatable back then—they were—but they also had the odd side-effect that, if it was a class you cared about, the test itself could be a learning experience. For context, I am also a faculty memb…

> It is. I think the professor here was being naive, but I appreciate his optimism. When I was in college (in the 90s), take home exams allowed a knowledgeable student to really shine. I’m not saying that they weren’t eminently cheatable back then—they were—but they also had the odd side-effect that, if it was a class you cared about, the test itself could be a learning experience.

I've never realized it before, but this is so true. Take home exams (or graded homeworks) allowed me to pour so much time in subjects I enjoyed, that I wouldn't have done otherwise.

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

#145

Post by eudamoniac »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #137
eudamoniac wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I understand the point of it, I just don't think it is worth the tens of thousands per person that it would cost to do it. I could accept a value argument for free university education in some form, but that form would not be for gradeless/credentialless unproductive studies. And it's not just that it would cost a lot, it's that it would cost a lot and a motivated person can already do a 90% job of it for free on…

who defines "unproductive?" You? That's the thing, like, there's not a whole hell of a lot I learned in Phil 201 that is directly applicable to my job, but, you know the class is valuable. I took art history in college. Turned into being one of the most important classes I ever took and I'm one of those stem major types. Productivity shouldn't be the point of education - you get productivity indirectly out of the edu…

You're going to have to make an argument for why the taxpayer needs to pay for every citizen to take art history beyond "it's valuable". Okay, but $20,000 is also valuable and there are opportunity costs.

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

#146

Post by yamillove »

otikik wrote: post #99
yamillove wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you had read the whole sentence, you would have found a few other words, which say “just because you have privilege.” All men are created equal. Civic duties apply equally to everyone. Once people have met their legal obligations (say, paying taxes and obeying the law), any additional generosity is voluntary, not owed, so having more privilege does not automatically create greater moral obligations. Say, I am beau…

- And remember, Peter, with great power comes great responsibility - No. It sucks for you. Sorry but that's life (Uncle Ben dies sad)

Liberals: “Introducing Peter Tax: $1.00 for every square you spend gliding instead of walking.”

Liberals: “People that glide should not exist!”

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

#147

Post by piloto_ciego »

hatradiowigwam wrote: post #141
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…

> How do we do that in tech? Hell if I know, maybe a proctored written exam, followed by an oral exam, then a project? But who knows. Ever taken a Redhat exam - such as Red Hat Certified Engineer? That's the right model. It's a hand-on exam with arbitrary exam objectives you have to meet (by any means possible, there is more than one right way to achieve desired state). There is no internet, devices, or anything else…

Man, I'm not a redhat guy, but that's pretty cool? I know I couldn't do that without the docs and a lot of time, but that's a good model. A practical demo is legit.

Maybe I'm a weirdo, but part of me wishes I could be like a sysadmin in a powerplant or like something similar where we used tools like that and I'd have to get really good at using them.

Flying was like that, you had to know what you were doing, and aspects of tech touch that, but certainly not in the domain I'm currently in. Seriously, cool, I didn't even know this existed.

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

#148

Post by piloto_ciego »

ItsMonkk wrote: post #140
piloto_ciego wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't this just kind of become kind of allow companies to direct the research towards their ends and the education be damned though? I wouldn't be opposed to this sort of thing intrinsically, but I worry about the incentives here.

This aligns the incentives. Education provides positive externalities that the market will not provide. > allow companies to direct the research towards their ends So long as they hit the requirements to reward the prize, I don't much care what else the students are driven to do. One might ask how does this differ from when a company hires a fresh graduate? In fact, I wouldn't mind also applying this system to those…

Meh, I don't think this is the right incentives we want to be pushing. Hire-ability shouldn't be what education is about...

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

#149

Post by piloto_ciego »

eudamoniac wrote: post #145
piloto_ciego wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who defines "unproductive?" You? That's the thing, like, there's not a whole hell of a lot I learned in Phil 201 that is directly applicable to my job, but, you know the class is valuable. I took art history in college. Turned into being one of the most important classes I ever took and I'm one of those stem major types. Productivity shouldn't be the point of education - you get productivity indirectly out of the edu…

You're going to have to make an argument for why the taxpayer needs to pay for every citizen to take art history beyond "it's valuable". Okay, but $20,000 is also valuable and there are opportunity costs.

No I'm not, you're the one who said, "unproductive stuff shouldn't get funded" - not me. I think we should fund all of it because well educated people should make better decisions in a democracy and I want the cross disciplinary effects that occur when people can freely study their passions.

I'd say, "why shouldn't so-called unproductive stuff get funded?"

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

#150

Post by MarsIronPI »

asdfasvea wrote: post #74
MarsIronPI wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

When that happens, the bridges will start collapsing and the generators will stop working. So I'm confident that when we get to that point people will come to their senses, at the latest.

Post reply on HN