←back to thread

Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

(www.bloomberg.com)
427 points JumpCrisscross | 3 comments | 20 Oct 24 17:26 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
greatartiste ◴[21 Oct 24 06:46 UTC] No.41901335[source]▶
For a human who deals with student work or reads job applications spotting AI generated work quickly becomes trivially easy. Text seems to use the same general framework (although words are swapped around) also we see what I call 'word of the week' where whichever 'AI' engine seems to get hung up on a particular English word which is often an unusual one and uses it at every opportunity. It isn't long before you realise that the adage that this is just autocomplete on steroids is true.

However programming a computer to do this isn't easy. In a previous job I had dealing with plagiarism detectors and soon realised how garbage they were (and also how easily fooled they are - but that is another story). The staff soon realised what garbage these tools are so if a student accused of plagiarism decided to argue back then the accusation would be quietly dropped.

replies(14): >>41901440 #>>41901484 #>>41901662 #>>41901851 #>>41901926 #>>41901937 #>>41902038 #>>41902121 #>>41902132 #>>41902248 #>>41902627 #>>41902658 #>>41903988 #>>41906183 #
tessierashpool9 ◴[21 Oct 24 07:41 UTC] No.41901662[source]▶
the students are too lazy and dumb to do their own thinking and resort to ai. the teachers are also too lazy and dumb to assess the students' work and resort to ai. ain't it funny?
replies(4): >>41901734 #>>41901918 #>>41902146 #>>41902152 #
A4ET8a8uTh0 ◴[21 Oct 24 09:13 UTC] No.41902146[source]▶
I suppose we all get from school what we put into it.

I forgot the name of the guy, who said it, but he was some big philosophy lecturer at Harvard and his view on the matter ( heavy reading course and one student left a course review - "not reading assigned reading did not hurt me at all") was ( paraphrased):

"This guy is an idiot if he thinks the point of paying $60k a semester of parents money is to sit here and learn nothing.'

replies(1): >>41903681 #
1. lupire ◴[21 Oct 24 12:58 UTC] No.41903681[source]▶
He's paying for the degree and the professional network. Studying would be a waste of time.
replies(1): >>41903795 #
2. A4ET8a8uTh0 ◴[21 Oct 24 13:11 UTC] No.41903795[source]▶
I hope it will not sound too preachy. You are right in a sense that it is what he thinks he is paying for, but is actually missing out on untapped value. He will not be able to discuss death as a concept throughout the lens of various authors. He will not wrestle with questions of cognition and its human limitations ( which amusingly is a relevant subject these days ). He will not learn anything. He is and will remain an adult child in adult daycare.

I could go on like this, but I won't. Each of us has a choice how we play the cards we are dealt.

I accept your point, but this point reinforces a perspective I heard from my accountant family member, who clearly can identify price, but has a hard time not equating it with value. I hesitate to use the word wrong, because it is pragmatic, but it is also rather wasteful ( if not outright dumb ).

replies(1): >>41909551 #
3. recursive ◴[21 Oct 24 23:16 UTC] No.41909551[source]▶
It's not wasteful if: the student "values" the credential but not the learning. Some people have no appetite for philosophy or the perspective of notable authors on death. He will probably learn something though.

Your characterization of an adult child does not seem fair. What makes someone an adult? If it's academic discourse, then why is it valuable?

I mean, if you're into it, more power to you. Go nuts with finally figuring out what makes a human. Just don't claim it's more virtuous than anyone else's hobby, unless you can find a reason.

To call it "wasteful" says that something of "value" is being squandered, but the value is perceived by each of us differently.