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

The role of the University is to resist AI

danmcquillan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#21

Post by psyklic »

The article's main point seems to be that students cheat with AI; hence, universities must "resist" AI to preserve critical thought.

Although universities are certainly against cheating, the responsibility has always been on the student not to cheat. Universities do not oppose useful technologies simply because they may be misused for cheating.

Put another way, the role of a university is to "discover and invent the future." In this light, universities will be more interested in developing AI than so-called "resisting" it. This is especially since it has already yielded breakthroughs in science, e.g. a Nobel Prize in Chemistry for protein prediction.

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#22

Post by _0ffh »

squigz wrote: post #17
_0ffh wrote: post #6

Schools in general are doomed to complete obsolescence now, as every kid can have their own personal AI tutor. Doesn't look much better for universities. Outside of lab work and testing, there is just no further need for them. There, I said it.

It's been possible for a very long time to try to learn things yourself - and I don't just mean the courses and other resources available online these days; one could always have went to a library and learned that way. The thing is, people still went to school. Why is that, do you think?

Because you can't just ask a book a question and instantly get presented with an answer at any required level of detail.

Apart from that, coercion and credentialism, where the latter can be provided with testing alone.

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#24

Post by [deleted] »

rightbyte wrote: post #12
_0ffh wrote: post #6

Schools in general are doomed to complete obsolescence now, as every kid can have their own personal AI tutor. Doesn't look much better for universities. Outside of lab work and testing, there is just no further need for them. There, I said it.

The main benefit of uni studies is nagging me to learn stuff. There, I said it.

[deleted]

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#25

Post by [deleted] »

bravesoul2 wrote: post #13
rob_c wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what people said about Google. Don't worry the worthwhile universities aren't going anywhere.

Of credentialism means nothing and the world turns to meritocracy most of us reading this now are doomed! I tend to thing that universities will be OK Even in subjects that just need a mind and maybe a computer like mathematics and computer science.

[deleted]

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#26

Post by simianwords »

A characteristic of LLMs bad articles is that they try to stack up small multidimensional criticisms in hopes that the at least one would stick.

LLMs curb independent thinking (links some n=5 article published recently)

LLMs reduce wages (wrong!!)

LLMs cause environmental damage (wrong!)

Add in some vague leftist jargon about decolonisation and you have your standard llms bad article. There is I admit, a nugget of truth in each criticism and I hope we can explore it from an unbiased angle.

After thinking about it I have a theory on the real reason some people have a bad opinion on LLMs.

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#27

Post by fleebee »

lugu wrote: post #23

Saying that LLM prevent independent thinking is like saying books prevent independent thinking. It depend how you use them.

Not everyone has a deep understanding of LLMs or the self-control to avoid the temptation of off-loading thinking to one. Many people are desperate enough to look to LLMs for medical advice or even friendship[0]. As workplaces and schools partner with Big Tech[1], LLM interfaces have already become embedded in everyday life as something you can't ignore.

There are no guardrails to LLMs. They remove friction from tasks that used to require critical thinking. We're constantly pressured into using them. I think only blaming the end-user is naive.

[0]: https://aeon.co/essays/our-crisis-is-not-loneliness-but-huma...

[1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danfitzpatrick/2025/02/26/chatg...

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#28

Post by squigz »

_0ffh wrote: post #22
squigz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been possible for a very long time to try to learn things yourself - and I don't just mean the courses and other resources available online these days; one could always have went to a library and learned that way. The thing is, people still went to school. Why is that, do you think?

Because you can't just ask a book a question and instantly get presented with an answer at any required level of detail. Apart from that, coercion and credentialism, where the latter can be provided with testing alone.

How do you know what questions to ask? How do you know the LLM is giving a good answer?

Asking questions and getting answers is only one part of learning; another, more important part, that's missing is putting it in context and laying it out in a manner that teaches the topic in a way that develops actual expertise. This is one part of the actual role of educators - which aren't going to go anywhere. To say nothing of the other benefits of an actual education: credentials, showing you can stick to something long-term, etc.

In any case, I don't disagree that LLMs can and should change education, and for the better - but I don't think universities are going anywhere, nor should they.

Anyway, if learning becomes so easily accessible, wouldn't it be even more important for employers to be able to vet potential hires? Surely companies can't be expected to interview the thousand new applicants that have put applicable skills on their resume simply because they talked to an LLM for a few hours and think that's sufficient to learn it?

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#29

Post by _0ffh »

squigz wrote: post #28
_0ffh wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you can't just ask a book a question and instantly get presented with an answer at any required level of detail. Apart from that, coercion and credentialism, where the latter can be provided with testing alone.

How do you know what questions to ask? How do you know the LLM is giving a good answer? Asking questions and getting answers is only one part of learning; another, more important part, that's missing is putting it in context and laying it out in a manner that teaches the topic in a way that develops actual expertise. This is one part of the actual role of educators - which aren't going to go anywhere. To say nothing…

Yes, you design a curriculum and feed it to the LLM. One person con do that for a course once, and then you can broadly leave it like that, with occasional updates - while each student gets their own personal teacher.

Educational cost could plummet like a rock while significantly improving results, if we just dare to allow it!

> wouldn't it be even more important for employers to be able to vet potential hires

Yes, I mentioned "testing" twice already. And most of that could be done via LLM as well, at least a coarse pre-screening for the obvious frauds. Also, where are all those people who claim to be Physicists "simply because they talked to an Physicist for a few hours"? You send the children through the curriculum, then you test them, as I said. Doesn't even have to be the same institution that does it.

School as we know it is a dead institution walking, and good riddance, and I very much hope the universities as we know them will cease to exists right along with it.

Re: The role of the University is to resist AI

#30

Post by squigz »

_0ffh wrote: post #29
squigz wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know what questions to ask? How do you know the LLM is giving a good answer? Asking questions and getting answers is only one part of learning; another, more important part, that's missing is putting it in context and laying it out in a manner that teaches the topic in a way that develops actual expertise. This is one part of the actual role of educators - which aren't going to go anywhere. To say nothing…

Yes, you design a curriculum and feed it to the LLM. One person con do that for a course once, and then you can broadly leave it like that, with occasional updates - while each student gets their own personal teacher. Educational cost could plummet like a rock while significantly improving results, if we just dare to allow it! > wouldn't it be even more important for employers to be able to vet potential hires Yes, I…

"Testing" is not really a good indicator of whether you were properly educated - that's why students get an overall grade not solely based on the year-end test.

I'm also not sure why you think testing would not go obsolete with traditional schooling?

Post reply on HN