pull down to refresh
184 sats \ 13 replies \ @SimpleStacker 7 Apr \ on: AI usage is now a baseline expectation - leaked Shopify memo AI
That's why I think profs fighting against AI use are actually doing their students a disservice.
The solution is not to ban AI, it's figuring out how to promote the responsible usage of AI.
I frequently tell the story of my high school math teacher that encouraged graphing calculator use when other teachers forbid them. My first programs were written on graphing calculators and I may have never found programming otherwise.
It's a bit more complicated with AI but I imagine Mr. Gahrst's approach would be like yours. He was pro-calculator because he got a dual masters in math and library science, only to have his library science degree become worthless after widespread use of computers.
reply
Yep, its a tool. It would be like going back in time and trying to tell students not to use Google or Wikipedia... oh wait... they did that too. Maybe the issue is "Higher Ed" not being all that smart or practical?
Obviously its all in HOW you use stuff and understanding how it works as well as what it is good at and what it is not good at.
reply
I clearly remember a grade where any online source was refused; only references to books from a library were ok.
Then there was a short time in history where they allowed online sources but said "not wikipedia though, wiki is not a source" but everyone knew you didn't cite Wikipedia itself, you cited the sources that wikipedia cited.
Then they gave up (and on to the next thing to resist)
reply
I never understood the Wikipedia slander.
99% of the math stuff I read there is correct.
Not sure about the more subjective stuff... but newspaper articles are also subjective, so why is Wikipedia worse as a source??
reply
reply
You know what is funny is that the fact anyone can edit it is only part of the story. The only people that use this argument haven't actually edited a page. I've messed with Wikipedia pages and created ones based on fabrications. Mostly because I just wanted to see what would happen. Lets just say... this argument is dumb.
Wikipedia isn't "true" but in my experience I trust it more than most books I read in school. At least, at this point.
reply
Its not hard. Wikipedia is a great source, not of truth but of information. The problem with most in education is not that they distrust Wikipedia but that they put to much trust in more traditional sources. Wikipedia is VERY useful in my experience but you can't just blindly trust it.
reply
Yeah, to me the issue isn't that people distrust Wikipedia, it's that they think it's less trustworthy than .gov or .edu. I forgot where I saw it, but I think I saw something teaching kids how to write, and they said that ".gov" and ".edu" sources are more credible.
The sad thing is--to the extent that you want to appear credible, that's probably correct, coz most people think that way.
But if you want to actually arrive at the truth, I don't automatically consider .gov or .edu more credible than anything else.
reply
Heard a great quote the other day about the AI leap we are all taking might actually be a cerebral one meaning not every one will be taking it with us like previous advances in technology.
This made a ton of sense when I first heard but after reflecting on it, it places a ton of responsibility on the people and institutions steering the transformation—those with access to the compute, the models, the power. It's stewardship in plain speak.
reply
Access to compute is going to be a huge source of further inequality and social stratification, I think
reply