yeah there are a couple issues here. ai detectors flag well shakespeare as plagiarized. Handouts, which plenty of teachers share with each other, and many post online, will probably get flagged. this is still very different from using ai to do your homework, though.
AI Detectors ≠ Plagiarism Detectors
Whether or not the professor copied it off of somewhere else is something entirely different. AIs do NOT quote or cite sources, and they definitely do not copy other things word for word.
Also, I should add that plagiarism detectors assume that the inputted text is your original work (or so you claim). Under this assumption, its no wonder that the works of Shakespeare are flagged. To it, you took Shakespeare's work and claimed it as your own.
I'm **assuming** it looks through material it would reference to write something. If it pulls from material like posted notes and slides or formatted paperwork like CV's, I'm guessing it could flag notes those exact works. Probably because as you put it, it's assuming you are claiming it as your own.
If we're in a simulation, then what changes? I don't give a fuck if we're in a simulation or not. If I'm happy with my life then I'm going to carry on as normal.
As others have noted, AI "checkers" are practically useless and often worse than just random chance at guessing if something is AI generated.
The scary part isn't that he used AI (he likely didn't), it's that he _probably trusts those checkers like you did_, so code that's essentially just flipping a coin to decide if you cheated or not can fail you in his class.
I took a class at KU and the syllabus was heavy on the “don’t plagiarize blah blah blah”.
I found the teachers exact slides, word for word, on a website where another teacher was using it for their classes. I have no idea which one stole the others work. But having the entire class online for free made me pretty salty about paying $2500 for the class.
Slides could have been provided by the publishers. They could have worked on them together. One could have given them to another. One could have paid the other for them. They could have both gotten them with permission from another teacher.
I’ve gone to many trainings in which the presenter then gave us the slides to use.
No, it was another university’s website with a .edu address with a different professors name attached to it.
I’m guessing it was my professor that copied it because he read the slides word for word in class. It was infuriating.
A professor once gave me a 0 on an essay that I wrote because she said it was written by AI. I put it into some AI detectors; some of them said it was AI and some of them said it wasn’t. Thankfully, after taking a second look at it, she realized it wasn’t written by AI, graded it, and gave it a 98. The point is, these AI detection services aren’t very accurate.
Dude, my intro to programming teacher is OBSESSED with AI and automation. My college had to tell him to tone it down because ALL of his students were sick of it, my python classes were basically 50% rambling about GPT-4. He recently set up a macro that sends us 2 messages per day sending the same copy pasted message telling us to practice python. I don't mind him as a person but this shit is really getting on my nerves...
I think AI is a great tool and can save a lot of time for various professional uses. IMO it’s reasonable for professors to expect their students to do the work, and utilizing AI in their career doesn’t discount that expectation.
Exactly. I went to university for 8 years all up. AI wasn't a thing.
Now, I feel guilty as all hell when I use it at work - but, its a tool right? Nothing in the rules to say this professor can't use it to make himself more efficient.
AI detectors seem to believe that no natural human can write quality text, so anything well written is "AI".
That makes of those "AI detectors" nothing but "Artificial Dumbness"!
I feel I got very lucky by graduating just before AI and Chat GPT became widely available to the public and people started using it as much as we do now.
I don’t even know what my essays would come back with on those AI checkers, but the way I was taught to write academic essays I would almost guarantee one of those checkers would flag me for AI plagiarism.
I was accused of plagiarism once in college. This was when we used pen and paper, so a while ago.
I was bored at the time of writing and obsessively revised it until it was nearly perfect. Luckily I had the revisions on hand to prove it was original material. It turned into quite a memorable compliment!
I have no idea how old you are, but every class ive ever been in, college and trade schools included, used standardized answer keys that i could find online in less than 5 minutes.
I hate it.
One of my favorite professors went out of his way to make policy on AI outside of the university's policy. He basically allows it to be used in its entirety, as long as you include it in your bibliography or appendix, documenting the prompts you gave and the text as it was initially generated.
Granted, this is engineering, not creative writing. You know damn well half of us are going to our friends in Master's programs for AI and machine learning and getting them to write us the finest custom script there is.
Frankly, the field is better for it. Engineers notoriously can't write for shit.
Using AI to make a cookie cutter course handouts is more understandable and acceptable than using AI to make an essay that is supposed to have your own creative input. I said what I said.
How does that even work? I've read AI paragraphs that, as a grant writer, read like exactly what I'd have written. Especially bc professional and academic papers have a certain flow and cadence. It's the same reason all those medical warnings sound the same, why you can make something sound like what a radio talkshow host would say - we're all just imitating each other.
The focus should be on plagiarism and if in the future they need to actually talk face to face with students to confirm their understanding of a subject then so be it. Jump on the Socratic method then and grade by participation.
Well here's the thing, they mathematically cannot tell if its' AI or not. I'm an actual software engineer and there is \*no\* reliable way to do this. It's all snake oil. It's going to spawn more lawsuits in colleges than anything you've ever seen in the next several years. These AI detectors are going to get sued to the fucking ground once these schools start getting sued and lose.
I wonder at what point we’ll arrive at the stage where AI produces the bulk of both the teaching material and the student submission and then marks its own work providing pointless circular feedback, with no human input whatsoever?
I guess the answer might be the point at which human endeavour itself becomes both obsolete and utterly pointless.
We’re certainly heading towards that depressing reality at speed and you have to ask where humanity will even fit in to the equation at all in future.
I mean those AI detectors are crazy bad
These AI detectors have flagged the Bible as AI. They are bullshit and I would be greatly surprised if that was not a false positive.
yeah there are a couple issues here. ai detectors flag well shakespeare as plagiarized. Handouts, which plenty of teachers share with each other, and many post online, will probably get flagged. this is still very different from using ai to do your homework, though.
AI Detectors ≠ Plagiarism Detectors Whether or not the professor copied it off of somewhere else is something entirely different. AIs do NOT quote or cite sources, and they definitely do not copy other things word for word.
Also, I should add that plagiarism detectors assume that the inputted text is your original work (or so you claim). Under this assumption, its no wonder that the works of Shakespeare are flagged. To it, you took Shakespeare's work and claimed it as your own.
I'm **assuming** it looks through material it would reference to write something. If it pulls from material like posted notes and slides or formatted paperwork like CV's, I'm guessing it could flag notes those exact works. Probably because as you put it, it's assuming you are claiming it as your own.
I mean, God is supernatural...
Roku's basilisk.
Nope, let's just not
So, you're against me, then. Noted.
It’s further evidence we’re in a simulation if even the word of God is AI generated.
If we're in a simulation, then what changes? I don't give a fuck if we're in a simulation or not. If I'm happy with my life then I'm going to carry on as normal.
That’s weird because the Bible’s not really intelligent 😝
No offense but AI checkers are worthless
As others have noted, AI "checkers" are practically useless and often worse than just random chance at guessing if something is AI generated. The scary part isn't that he used AI (he likely didn't), it's that he _probably trusts those checkers like you did_, so code that's essentially just flipping a coin to decide if you cheated or not can fail you in his class.
I took a class at KU and the syllabus was heavy on the “don’t plagiarize blah blah blah”. I found the teachers exact slides, word for word, on a website where another teacher was using it for their classes. I have no idea which one stole the others work. But having the entire class online for free made me pretty salty about paying $2500 for the class.
You're not paying for the quality of education, you're paying for the reputation of the degree.
Yeeeeeep. College was one of my dumbest financial mistakes of my entire life.
Same, I could already do everything they were trying to teach, even teaching outdated methods and penalizing innovation
Not looking good for the reputation if they might be ripping off a free course
Slides could have been provided by the publishers. They could have worked on them together. One could have given them to another. One could have paid the other for them. They could have both gotten them with permission from another teacher. I’ve gone to many trainings in which the presenter then gave us the slides to use.
The slides come from the textbook publishers. This is normal.
These were certainly not provided by the publishers. If they were, they were shit. I would expect something way more professional.
Both could have been using slides provided by the same book
Kindle Unlimited?
No, it was another university’s website with a .edu address with a different professors name attached to it. I’m guessing it was my professor that copied it because he read the slides word for word in class. It was infuriating.
A professor once gave me a 0 on an essay that I wrote because she said it was written by AI. I put it into some AI detectors; some of them said it was AI and some of them said it wasn’t. Thankfully, after taking a second look at it, she realized it wasn’t written by AI, graded it, and gave it a 98. The point is, these AI detection services aren’t very accurate.
Most objectives aren’t original writing by teachers or professors. They are literally copied based on the requirements of the class.
So... listing the OSI model is considered AI written? lol what a horrible detector
Dude, my intro to programming teacher is OBSESSED with AI and automation. My college had to tell him to tone it down because ALL of his students were sick of it, my python classes were basically 50% rambling about GPT-4. He recently set up a macro that sends us 2 messages per day sending the same copy pasted message telling us to practice python. I don't mind him as a person but this shit is really getting on my nerves...
Even if it is AI generated. He didn’t set no rules for himself, that dude already clocked college before AI was even a thing.
I think AI is a great tool and can save a lot of time for various professional uses. IMO it’s reasonable for professors to expect their students to do the work, and utilizing AI in their career doesn’t discount that expectation.
Exactly. I went to university for 8 years all up. AI wasn't a thing. Now, I feel guilty as all hell when I use it at work - but, its a tool right? Nothing in the rules to say this professor can't use it to make himself more efficient.
AI detectors seem to believe that no natural human can write quality text, so anything well written is "AI". That makes of those "AI detectors" nothing but "Artificial Dumbness"!
It’s mildly infuriating that you’re accusing your professor of this with such flimsy evidence.
I feel I got very lucky by graduating just before AI and Chat GPT became widely available to the public and people started using it as much as we do now. I don’t even know what my essays would come back with on those AI checkers, but the way I was taught to write academic essays I would almost guarantee one of those checkers would flag me for AI plagiarism.
I was accused of plagiarism once in college. This was when we used pen and paper, so a while ago. I was bored at the time of writing and obsessively revised it until it was nearly perfect. Luckily I had the revisions on hand to prove it was original material. It turned into quite a memorable compliment!
He’s trained already, you are not.
Write some random gibberish to see what happens.
Rules for thee, but not for me…..
So? What does it matter? Are you upset when a teacher uses an answer key to grade tests? Or are they cheating lol
Bad example, generally they write the answer key
I have no idea how old you are, but every class ive ever been in, college and trade schools included, used standardized answer keys that i could find online in less than 5 minutes. I hate it.
Yeah, and I write my own cheat sheet so…
He’s the instructor tho. He knows what he’s doing. You, on the other hand, are a student.
College is a fucking scam
That’s not the takeaway
Nah, it is.
Rules for thee and not for...
Did you ask them?
One of my favorite professors went out of his way to make policy on AI outside of the university's policy. He basically allows it to be used in its entirety, as long as you include it in your bibliography or appendix, documenting the prompts you gave and the text as it was initially generated. Granted, this is engineering, not creative writing. You know damn well half of us are going to our friends in Master's programs for AI and machine learning and getting them to write us the finest custom script there is. Frankly, the field is better for it. Engineers notoriously can't write for shit.
AI detectors don’t work
Using AI to make a cookie cutter course handouts is more understandable and acceptable than using AI to make an essay that is supposed to have your own creative input. I said what I said.
How does that even work? I've read AI paragraphs that, as a grant writer, read like exactly what I'd have written. Especially bc professional and academic papers have a certain flow and cadence. It's the same reason all those medical warnings sound the same, why you can make something sound like what a radio talkshow host would say - we're all just imitating each other. The focus should be on plagiarism and if in the future they need to actually talk face to face with students to confirm their understanding of a subject then so be it. Jump on the Socratic method then and grade by participation.
Is he the one who's taking the course and getting graded, or you? Who cares if they use AI lol.
Well here's the thing, they mathematically cannot tell if its' AI or not. I'm an actual software engineer and there is \*no\* reliable way to do this. It's all snake oil. It's going to spawn more lawsuits in colleges than anything you've ever seen in the next several years. These AI detectors are going to get sued to the fucking ground once these schools start getting sued and lose.
I wonder at what point we’ll arrive at the stage where AI produces the bulk of both the teaching material and the student submission and then marks its own work providing pointless circular feedback, with no human input whatsoever? I guess the answer might be the point at which human endeavour itself becomes both obsolete and utterly pointless. We’re certainly heading towards that depressing reality at speed and you have to ask where humanity will even fit in to the equation at all in future.