←back to thread

395 points pseudolus | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.535s | source
Show context
dtnewman ◴[] No.43633873[source]
> A common question is: “how much are students using AI to cheat?” That’s hard to answer, especially as we don’t know the specific educational context where each of Claude’s responses is being used.

I built a popular product that helps teachers with this problem.

Yes, it's "hard to answer", but let's be honest... it's a very very widespread problem. I've talked to hundreds of teachers about this and it's a ubiquitous issue. For many students, it's literally "let me paste the assignment into ChatGPT and see what it spits out, change a few words and submit that".

I think the issue is that it's so tempting to lean on AI. I remember long nights struggling to implement complex data structures in CS classes. I'd work on something for an hour before I'd have an epiphany and figure out what was wrong. But that struggling was ultimately necessary to really learn the concepts. With AI, I can simply copy/paste my code and say "hey, what's wrong with this code?" and it'll often spot it (nevermind the fact that I can just ask ChatGPT "create a b-tree in C" and it'll do it). That's amazing in a sense, but also hurts the learning process.

replies(34): >>43633957 #>>43634006 #>>43634053 #>>43634075 #>>43634251 #>>43634294 #>>43634327 #>>43634339 #>>43634343 #>>43634407 #>>43634559 #>>43634566 #>>43634616 #>>43634842 #>>43635388 #>>43635498 #>>43635830 #>>43636831 #>>43638149 #>>43638980 #>>43639096 #>>43639628 #>>43639904 #>>43640528 #>>43640853 #>>43642243 #>>43642367 #>>43643255 #>>43645561 #>>43645638 #>>43646665 #>>43646725 #>>43647078 #>>43654777 #
bko ◴[] No.43634075[source]
When modern search became more available, a lot of people said there's no point of rote memorization as you can just do a Google search. That's more or less accepted today.

Whenever we have a new technology there's a response "why do I need to learn X if I can always do Y", and more or less, it has proven true, although not immediately.

For instance, I'm not too concerned about my child's ability to write very legibly (most writing is done on computers), spell very well (spell check keeps us professional), reading a map to get around (GPS), etc

Not that these aren't noble things or worth doing, but they won't impact your life too much if you're not interest in penmanship, spelling, or cartography.

I believe LLMs are different (I am still stuck in the moral panic phase), but I think my children will have a different perspective (similar to how I feel about memorizing poetry and languages without garbage collection). So how do I answer my child when he asks "Why should I learn to do X if I can just ask an LLM and it will do it better than me"

replies(40): >>43634150 #>>43634156 #>>43634179 #>>43634211 #>>43634224 #>>43634268 #>>43634272 #>>43634362 #>>43634379 #>>43634426 #>>43634553 #>>43634592 #>>43634594 #>>43634728 #>>43634751 #>>43634838 #>>43635045 #>>43638038 #>>43638584 #>>43638671 #>>43638992 #>>43639074 #>>43639153 #>>43639324 #>>43639407 #>>43639632 #>>43639682 #>>43639789 #>>43639811 #>>43639836 #>>43639840 #>>43640113 #>>43640256 #>>43641056 #>>43641103 #>>43641125 #>>43641204 #>>43642320 #>>43646786 #>>43646876 #
kibwen ◴[] No.43634268[source]
The irreducible answer to "why should I" is that it makes you ever-more-increasingly reliant on a teetering tower of fragile and interdependent supply chains furnished by for-profit companies who are all too eager to rake you over the coals to fulfill basic cognitive functions.

Like, Socrates may have been against writing because he thought it made your memory weak, but at least I, an individual, am perfectly capable of manufacturing my own writing implements with a modest amount of manual labor and abundantly-available resources (carving into wood, burning wood into charcoal to write on stone, etc.). But I ain't perfectly capable of doing the same to manufacture an integrated circuit, let alone a digital calculator, let alone a GPU, let alone an LLM. Anyone who delegates their thought to a corporation is permanently hitching their fundamental ability to think to this wagon.

replies(6): >>43634346 #>>43634369 #>>43634392 #>>43634610 #>>43639592 #>>43642011 #
notyourwork ◴[] No.43634346[source]
Although I agree, convincing children to learn using that rationalization won’t work.
replies(1): >>43634556 #
bigstrat2003 ◴[] No.43634556[source]
Yes it does. Plenty of children accept "you won't always have (tool)" as a reason for learning.
replies(2): >>43634987 #>>43638776 #
freeone3000 ◴[] No.43638776[source]
“You won’t always have a calculator” became moderately false to laughably false as I went from middle to high school. Every task I will ever do for money will be done on a computer.

I’m still garbage at arithmetic, especially mental math, and it really hasn’t inhibited my career in any way.

replies(2): >>43638959 #>>43641571 #
goatlover ◴[] No.43638959[source]
It's pretty annoying in customer service when someone handing you back change has difficulty doing the math. There's been many times doing simple arithmetic in my head has been helpful, including times when my hands were occupied.
replies(1): >>43640379 #
laichzeit0 ◴[] No.43640379[source]
I don’t know where you live, but I haven’t used nor carried cash on me for at least 5 years now. Everything either takes card or just tap using your phone/watch. Everything. Parking meters, cashiers, online shopping, filling up your car. I live in a “third world” country too.
replies(1): >>43640627 #
1. goatlover ◴[] No.43640627[source]
Good for you? I use cash half the time. For one thing, I'm not tracked for every single purchase.
replies(1): >>43640741 #
2. rpmisms ◴[] No.43640741[source]
I also love (and own) goats and use cash for most purchases.