QuaternionsRock @ QuaternionsRock @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

400

Joined

2 yr. ago

I totally agree, there is rarely any way to tell if (and more importantly, to what extent) student-submitted writing is AI generated. We’re probably also pretty close to AI being able to generate outstanding work while mimicking your own writing style. For this reason, in my mind, the era of take-home writing assignments is coming to a close.

I’m actually okay with this, as it will hopefully force teachers to be more creative with and involved in the learning process. One of my biggest takeaways from 12 years of grade school was that homework trends over the last few decades are patently absurd, fueled in large part by lazy teaching. I see AI as a chance to finally correct that trend.

Using AI to streamline that is not cheating unless it’s an English writing class.

Using AI to streamline that is cheating if and only if the course syllabus defines it as cheating.

Also, I hate to break it to you, but somewhere between “many” and “most” college classes are writing classes in disguise, depending on your major. The ability to write well is massively important, and generative AI is prohibited for the same reason that teachers try to make sure you understand arithmetic before letting you use a calculator. The key difference is that writing is subjective and way more complex, so the best teachers can aim for is continuous improvement.

I say all this as a college student who uses AI nearly every day. A good chunk of my peers absolutely misuse it.

and its not like these AI detection tools arent snakeoil either.

Indeed, they are.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0!

Why? You realize that you reserve more rights by not including a license than by including one, right?

Ehhh…

They integrated GPT last year. It’s entirely possible to use Grammarly in a way that raises academic integrity concerns nowadays.

Unfortunately, that’s not what Fetterman is saying.

Fetterman noted during an interview an uptick in Democrats who have become more critical of Biden lately, and said it’s only helping former President Trump.

“I don’t understand why,” Fetterman said, speaking on “Morning Joe” on MSNBC. “I don’t know what’s in it for you to do that whether you’re just chasing clout or you want to make it in the news or anything like that. But if you’re not willing to just support the president now and say these kinds of things, you might as well just get your MAGA hat, because you now are helping Trump with this.”

He’s addressing other Democratic politicians, whom would probably be one of the last groups to not vote for Biden. He seems to think that Biden would fare better in November if Dems outright refuse to acknowledge the realities of unprecedented homelessness, Israeli war money, or being 81 years old. (Because forcing people to look to Republicans for a dissenting opinion on these subjects is a great idea.)

You should vote for Biden if you don’t want Trump, obviously. And vote for Fetterman over whomever if you don’t want whomever. But either Fetterman severely misspoke here, or his opinion goes way beyond that, and I can’t help but lose a lot of respect I had for him.

It is true that Reddit does not hold a valid license to content that is

1. Sufficiently long-form, unique etc. to be copyrightable, and
2. posted by someone other than the copyright holder or someone with a sufficient license.

However, as far as I understand it, the extent to which Reddit—a content provider and social network—is legally required to remedy this is to comply with DMCA requests and review reported content. Perhaps there is a higher standard that I am not aware of?

There is no consciousness here. There is no self awareness. No emotion. No ability to reason or deduct.

Of all of these qualities, only the last one—the ability to reason or deduct—is a widely-accepted prerequisite for intelligence.

I would also argue that contemporary LLMs demonstrate the ability to reason by correctly deriving mathematical proofs that do not appear in the training datasets. How would you be able to accomplish such a feat without some degree of reasoning?

LLMs have zero ability to reject data based on their understanding of reality.

Me:

I just found a proof that 2+2=5!

ChatGPT:

The statement "2 + 2 = 5" is a classic example of a mathematical fallacy or incorrect reasoning, often used for humorous or illustrative purposes. In standard arithmetic, of course, 2 + 2 = 4. Proofs claiming to show otherwise rely on some form of invalid manipulation of algebraic properties or deliberate arithmetic mistakes.

A common "proof" of 2 + 2 = 5 might go something like this:

1. Start with an incorrect assumption or manipulate the algebraic steps in a way that hides a division by zero or another illegal operation.
2. Through these manipulations, arrive at the conclusion that 2 + 2 = 5.

However, each step of a valid mathematical proof must adhere strictly to the rules and properties of mathematics. Any proof leading to 2 + 2 = 5 will contain an error or a misapplication of those rules.

If you have a specific "proof" in mind, I can help identify the error in it.

Because Drake is from Canada

I'm fairly sure it's possible to make an iPhone app without copying any of Apple's copyrighted code or using any of their patents.

This sounds wrong, but I was never particularly interested in iOS app development, so take that with a grain of salt.

The GNU GPL prohibits non-GPL software from even dynamically linking to GPL libraries. Assuming that enforcing such a condition is acceptable under relevant copyright law, and that you can’t make an iOS app without linking to any Apple libraries, Apple does have a legal mechanism to enforce this.

French developers may get a pass, with VLC and all.

So who will be Napoleon this time?

they warped that into this supposedly big scary defect, which is manipulative at best

Ah, I see where you’re coming from now. Something like that is obviously a minor defect, and it should be treated as such.

At the same time as Tom's Hardware made a very wrong and bogus claim

Wait, so the claim about the thermal safety defect was incorrect? That changes everything, and it’s the other half of what I’ve been trying to figure out the whole time. I’ve been struggling to find any information on the claim one way or the other.

It’s starting to sound like you have never seen any evidence that reporting on a rare AMD thermal safety defect is an intricate Intel psyop, or whatever the claim is.

My first comment in this thread simply asked for an explanation as to how a reported (and again, unimportant) defect in AMD chips is somehow Intel’s fault. I guess it was silly of me to expect a straight answer from AMDIsOurLord.

I read that article and looked around a bit, and I can’t find anything related to AMD’s thermal safety mechanisms. What am I missing?

some time later AMD brought their asses to court and sued over it, with literally billions in damages and agreements that Intel had to pay.

A ha! This part of the story hasn’t been brought up yet, and it sounds like it would completely change my opinion.

The cooler falling off is an impossible situation. It's a completely bullshit metric.

I don’t disagree - I can’t imagine that ever happening in real life. But taking the cooler off while it’s running? I can definitely envision my idiot 13-year-old self doing that back when I was building my first PC.

Intel CPUs of the time ran hotter, used more power, and had lower IPC, hence the higher clock speeds but lower actual performance. They had to invent some bullshit to make themselves look good.

Given this information, I probably still would have gone with the Athlon. Are you saying that a report about a very-difficult-to-trigger defect in the thermal safety single-handedly convinced thousands/millions of potential customers to choose the Pentium instead?

Besides, just a while before that generation thermal safety wasn't even a thing, if you remove the cooler from older Intel processors it just catches fire lol

I’m guessing that’s why thermal safety was a selling point, no?

No, you shouldn’t have posted it to Reddit, in which you were required to give them a perpetual license to use your IP in any way they see fit.

For the record, I’m here because Reddit pissed me off when they axed the free API, and I’m pissed at myself for not expecting it. That’s what I get for accepting their terms and conditions, I guess.

Edit: I also don’t accept the idea that using my content for training data is “fair use” when it is used to train proprietary models, especially ones in which the end user is allowed to prompt it to plagiarize or otherwise imitate my content.

Fair enough, that wasn’t clear to me.

I’m not 100% sure what you mean by that, but I’m trying to say that, if Altman is a problem due to his wealth, then the bar to becoming a problem is substantially lower than a billion dollars.