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

I Wasn't Allowed Prompting ChatGPT During My Chalk Talk: This Is Discrimination (2025)

inpreparation.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–156 of 156 posts

Re: I Wasn't Allowed Prompting ChatGPT During My Chalk Talk: This Is Discrimination (2025)

#151

Post by wiseowise »

handoflixue wrote: post #147
wiseowise wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She can’t answer a single thing without opening her laptop.

Yeah, and the deaf lady can't answer a single thing without her interpreter. Again, what's your point? Is this a field where people are expected to work without a laptop for some reason? Like, I get why we'd want a pilot not to need ChatGPT, but a scientist is not in any of those categories.

> Yeah, and the deaf lady can't answer a single thing without her interpreter.

Deaf lady is missing her hearing and therefore requires hearing aids to hear, so following your logic Rachel is missing her thinking therefore she requires ChatGPT to do thinking for her. Glad we're on the same page.

Re: I Wasn't Allowed Prompting ChatGPT During My Chalk Talk: This Is Discrimination (2025)

#152

Post by wiseowise »

handoflixue wrote: post #148
wiseowise wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Found Rachel. Thinking and doing things with this archaic thing called “brain” is not a horse, and using LLM is not a truck.

Do you do all your arithmetic by hand, or do you insist on using this archaic thing called "brain"? Why are you even on the internet if you value this "brain" thing so much?

> Do you do all your arithmetic by hand, or do you insist on using this archaic thing called "brain"?

I don't need calculator to know that arithmetic exists and what it is.

Re: I Wasn't Allowed Prompting ChatGPT During My Chalk Talk: This Is Discrimination (2025)

#153

Post by watwut »

> When you ask me to explain my research without ChatGPT, you are asking me to speak on behalf of a collaborator who is not in the room. Would you ask a PI to give a talk without allowing them to mention the work of their postdocs?

PI or that postdoc should be able to explain the project as such, without mentioning who exactly did what.

They must talk about colleagues when attributing to protect and create their careers.

Re: I Wasn't Allowed Prompting ChatGPT During My Chalk Talk: This Is Discrimination (2025)

#154

Post by watwut »

Dependance wrote: post #16
mrgoldenbrown wrote: post #11

This is satire.

Honest question : does it need to be said ? It's like the /s sign. Can some people not, for themselves, realize that this text is meant as a more or less a joke ? And before you ask, yeah, I am aware some of the people are on the spectrum, but still... Is humor that hard to grasp on the internet ?

> Is humor that hard to grasp on the internet ?

It is just a joke was succesfully used as a goto excuse foe years. Usually when people actually have more of extreme stance, test waters and find that "not yet".

And since it was succesfull, many people dont want to play that game anymore or simply dont believe it anymore.

Re: I Wasn't Allowed Prompting ChatGPT During My Chalk Talk: This Is Discrimination (2025)

#155

Post by semi-extrinsic »

low_tech_love wrote: post #72

It’s a joke and all but also not really? You might have to go do a chalk talk at some point, and that is basically the only part of this article that is actually not real. The rest (about how everyone in academia is prompting everything) is absolutely VERY real. The word around all the scientific communities which I’m in contact with (to be honest, not so many) is basically “oh, there is no way to stop it, so we’ll e…

> If you’re good at prompting, you’ll prompt, and there is no way in hell someone that doesn’t prompt has any chance at all at, well, anything academic really.

This is far too bleak a view. I've been doing a wide range of academic writing, from journal papers to successful Horizon Europe grant applications, for the past 15 years. And it's no more difficult to achieve success today with 100% non-AI contributions than it was in the before times.

In fact, some of the most difficult parts of science - building relations, collaborations and consortia; formulating new hypotheses that are actually interesting and will get you noticed; giving convincing presentations on stage; are things AI is terrible/useless at.

Re: I Wasn't Allowed Prompting ChatGPT During My Chalk Talk: This Is Discrimination (2025)

#156

Post by ghusto »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #71
ghusto wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it's this poorly executed, yes it needs to be said. I was going back and forth on whether it was for far longer than I should have been.

> When it's this poorly executed, yes it needs to be said Isn't that a mark of great satire? That the argument sort of works within the zeitgeist, thereby showing the zeitgeist to be corrupted. Over-the-top satire is funny. But it's clumsy. The fact that some people who are being satirised will agree with the satire is what makes it great.

Yes, but it's a thin line, and I contend that this is over that line.

If you satarise Nazis and some Nazis can't tell that you're making fun of them, that's good satire. If you write a peice that reads like any other peice of Nazi literature, that's not understanding what satire is.

Post reply on HN