←back to thread

645 points bradgessler | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
don_neufeld ◴[] No.44009004[source]
Completely agree.

From all of my observations, the impact of LLMs on human thought quality appears largely corrosive.

I’m very glad my kid’s school has hardcore banned them. In some class they only allow students to turn in work that was done in class, under the direct observation of the teacher. There has also been a significant increase in “on paper” work vs work done on computer.

Lest you wonder “what does this guy know anyways?”, I’ll share that I grew up in a household where both parents were professors of education.

Understanding the effectiveness of different methods of learning (my dad literally taught Science Methods) were a frequent topic. Active learning (creating things using what you’re learning about) is so much more effective than passive, reception oriented methods. I think LLMs largely are supporting the latter.

replies(6): >>44009388 #>>44010296 #>>44010436 #>>44010768 #>>44011460 #>>44011653 #
hammock ◴[] No.44010768[source]
> I’m very glad my kid’s school has hardcore banned them.

What does that mean, I’m curious?

The schools and university I grew up in had a “single-sanction honor code” which meant if you were caught lying or cheating even once you would be expelled. And you signed the honor code at the top of every test.

My more progressive friends at other schools who didn’t have an honor code happily poo-pooed it as a repugnantly harsh old fashioned standard. But I don’t see a better way today of enforcing “don’t use AI” in schools, than it.

replies(4): >>44010858 #>>44011199 #>>44011668 #>>44013992 #
1. BobbyTables2 ◴[] No.44011668[source]
Today such infractions might result in a verbal warning…