251–260 of 828 posts
WAL-E and Idiocracy. The future.
I have some sympathy for these kids. If LLMs were around when I was a student, I would've also used them to "speed up" my homework assignments then proceed to fail all my tests. Now I work mostly with PhDs who were at the top of every academic environment they've ever been in. And yet I can see their thinking skills rapidly declining as well; many of them can no longer brainstorm, code, think deeply, or write without…
As much as I hate to admit it, using agents for too long makes me less able to think for myself. I am dedicating 30 mins to 1 hour everyday writing and thinking without LLMs.
CS Professor here: just yesterday I did the discussion of a course projects' (Parallel Computing), and one of the three groups that I did yesterday have clearly gone the ChatGPT way. They couldn't even understand the choices the LLM made regarding the architecture, etc. The way to "catch" these students is similar to what we did in the past when students copied from other students which is "to give them rope to hang"…
> The other two groups also used LLM but in a high-level and architectural way. Sounds more like the score is 3/3 (100%) Would you have accepted them cooy-pasting code from libraries together to build their project? If not, why is using LLM generated code different?
I have some sympathy for these kids. If LLMs were around when I was a student, I would've also used them to "speed up" my homework assignments then proceed to fail all my tests. Now I work mostly with PhDs who were at the top of every academic environment they've ever been in. And yet I can see their thinking skills rapidly declining as well; many of them can no longer brainstorm, code, think deeply, or write without…
I think this is true of every affliction that adults criticize children and teenagers of
I’ve been out of university for a very long time, and I took a community college course and for the first few sessions I couldn't focus or sit still at all. Fortunately I knew that was abnormal and how to conform to a prior version of myself, but I don’t think children have a frame of reference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMS didn’t invent cheating just made it easier. When you cheat you’re the one who cheats yourself because the point of an education is to learn, not complete the assignments and get high marks on tests alone. No one benefits and no one other than you is materially hurt by cheating, but you are absolutely the one who is hurt. There’s no way to learn than to force the brain into adaptation which it is resistant to do…
You're right. But I like to add artwork to my presentations. My artistic skills have not advanced beyond 2nd grade. So I'll make a line sketch, and give to AI to "fix" it. The results are nice and I use them. I have no interest in learning how to do art well myself, so using AI for it is appropriate. But I still write my code myself.
I haven't seen your presentations, so I can't speak to them. But I do know at work there's a lot more illustrations in docs and presentations and such, and they almost all have an AI art "tell". I find them grating and distracting from the actual content. Very rarely do they add anything useful to the doc other than the knowledge that the owner burned some GPU time and tokens for a distracting, low value illustration.
I can only imagine how an actual artist or graphic designer feels about it.
Actually I don't have to imagine; there's some serious vitriol over on some of my favorite webcomics about it.
I have some sympathy for these kids. If LLMs were around when I was a student, I would've also used them to "speed up" my homework assignments then proceed to fail all my tests. Now I work mostly with PhDs who were at the top of every academic environment they've ever been in. And yet I can see their thinking skills rapidly declining as well; many of them can no longer brainstorm, code, think deeply, or write without…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not American so maybe I am missing some context. But how did admissions work without test scores?
[flagged]
Besides lost meritocracy, that is accidentally filtering for ability and willingness to manipulate others emotionally. Which feels really scary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I totally agree about school-level homework: it was many years before my pre-frontal cortex developed enough that I could have forced myself to do the work. That said, though, one thing I don't understand about the heavy users of AI in academia and software development is that the thinking and coding is the fun part . And that's the part so many people seem to be so keen to automate away.
Isn't the fun part having the thing work how you wanted it to? Why shouldn't I be keen to automate the process away?
*speaking of things I should be doing less of...
In unrelated news "More than 600 University of California faculty members, led by mathematicians at UC Berkeley, are calling on the system to reinstate standardized testing requirements for science, technology, engineering and mathematics applicants, saying that six years of test-free admissions has not reliably assessed readiness and professors are often teaching middle school math to incoming students." https://arc…
And what possible benefit would that have?
A famous MIT professor did a sabatical at our AI lab. He said it was "a joy to teach here, as you can rely on students being proficient in basic math as opposed to the US where you have to teach those explicitly or lose the class completely". That was in the 1980s. My first math exam as a CS undergraduate, 123 out of 129 students failed. The math department professors refused to dumb down their classes for CS student…
To be honest, there’s approximately zero reasons to teach major-grade math to just about anyone but math majors. None of the applied math disciplines need go that deep, and what they do need depends on the field (physics is all about analysis, CS is about algebra and discrete math, and so on).