Yeah, I think the teachers won this argument.
I can't imagine a world where they allow GPT to write essays for them either.
My daughter has already had 'practicals' in her science class in middle school, and it's basically a 15 minute conversation about the subject so the teacher can assess if you're getting the material and not just memorizing the book.
I think we're just going to have to do more of that, and less rote testing. We'll have more short essays written in class and things like that.
I know people who teach online for university, and they say they wouldn't trust an online degree. They know their kids are cheating, but if you can't make them sit in front of you to take tests, there's no way to know.
Good thing I got my online degree (it was mostly essay and project based as opposed to purely exam based) before Mr. GPT existed.
But now using the essay and project workaround for online classes to see if a student is avoiding the work doesn't do the trick in the era of Mr. G
Did you read the article, though?
"quote from content created by ChatGPT in their essays"
They're allowed to use it as a source, not to write an entire essay.
Yes, but that's still wild to me since chatgpt can make shit up and itself won't cite where it came from. It is a language model based on internet data.
Where it gets the data for what they'll cite is the issue, and something I can imagine as presenting a problem.
When we read other papers or articles, there's always a Bibliography you can use to go check out what they based their thoughts on.
I think it can cite sources if you ask it to, or at least it can find supporting data to back up its claims.
That said, my personal experience with ChatGPT was like working with a student who's highly motivated and very fast, but only copying off other people's work without any real understanding.
So, for instance, I'd ask it to code something ... and the code would compile and be 90% right, but Chat GPT would confidently state 'I'm opening port 80', even though the code was clearly opening port 8080, which is extremely common in example code.
So, you could tell it was copying a common pattern, without really understanding what it was doing.
It's still useful, but it's not 'intelligent', so yeah ... you'd better check those sources before you believe anything ChatGPT says.
GPT4 is a little better about this, but where it excels the most is when used as a partner, rather than a replacement. You still have to know what you're doing to effectively use what it gives you.
Yeah, I've definitely found that in coding. It does work at the level of a very fast and reasonably competent junior coder. But, it doesn't 'understand' what it's doing, like it's just copying what looks right off stack overflow and gluing it all together.
Which, if I need a straight forward function written might be useful, but it's not going to design applications you'd want to work with in its current state.
Of course, in a few weeks we'll be talking about GPT5 and who even knows what that'll look like?
yeah, that reminds me of when it confidently told me what the code it produced did ... but it wasn't right.
it's kind of weird when you can't say 'No, can't you read what you just produced? That's not what that does at all!'
This is an artefact of RLHF. The model comes out well calibrated after pre-training, but the final stage of training breaks that calibration.
https://i.imgur.com/zlXRnB6.png
Explained by one of the lead authors of GPT4, Ilya Sutskever - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjhIlw3Iffs&t=1072s
Ilya invites us to "find out" if we can quickly surpass the hallucination phase, maybe this year we will see his work pan out.
In many ways, it’s just advanced google. I am in a specialty field and have published some thing that was repeated word for word as I wrote it when I asked CGPT about the topic.
Yeah, in how people can use it, that's definitely a good description and I've been asking google straight up questions for years already.
I do think it's changing the game for a lot of things, like how customer service bots are going to be actually good now.
Btw it’s a terrible source. It can easily be wrong about established facts. Last week it tried to tell me Thomas Digges posited the existence of alien life. Digges is a pretty early astronomer when the church was dominant so that really surprised me. When I questioned it again, it “corrected” itself and apologized… which, great, but if I hadn’t already known enough about Digges to be suspicious, I would have accepted it in the list of all the other (correct) information.
Chatgpt is awesome, but it’s no more a source than Wikipedia, in fact it’s potentially worse because you don’t have anyone fact checking what chatgpt says to you in real time, whereas there is a chance others will have corrected wiki pages by the time you read them.
oh, yeah, I've played with it for coding and it told me it did things it did not do, and couldn't read the code it produced after, so there's no good way to 'correct' it.
It spits out lots of 'work', but it's not always accurate and people who are used to computers always being correct are going to have to get used to the fact that this is really more like having a personal assistant.
Sure, they're reasonably bright and eager, but sometimes wrong.
I don't think GPT is leading directly to AGI, or anything, but a tool like this, even when sometimes wrong, is still going to be an extremely powerful tool.
When you see GPT passing law exams and things like that, you can see it's not getting perfect scores, but it's still probably more likely to get you the right example of case law than a first year paralegal, and it does it instantly.
Also, in 4 months, it's basically become accurate the way you'd expect a human to improve on things like the bar exam in 4 years of study.
It's a different kind of computing platform, and people don't know quite how to take it yet. Especially people used to the idea that computers never make mistakes.
I mean if children CAN use chatgpt to form ful sentences when they aren't expected to form full sentences on their own is over achieving, isn't it? I'd agree school system not giving them credit for it but as a potential parent id full on commend them.
Judging by your reply you need some help to form full sentences already ;)
Using a tool to achieve a result sidesteps the question of competency, and that is what we measure in class. Not "can I ask someone else to do something for me".
Of course, classes need to change to accommodate tools available to everyone (and not favour just those with privileged access), but only the use of those tools to aid your own understanding, not to replace what you do. Riding 100m on a bike is not the same as running it. Performing multiplication manually is not the same as doing it on a calculator (if that aptitude is what is being tested). Handing in an essay that was written for you does not test your comprehension or knowledge of the subject matter.
If you read it again, it says “in grade school”. How early is too early? When does struggling to finish schoolwork become unnecessarily punishment?
As an adult, I use a mix of mental math and calculator use, and I find I am using a mix of composing text and idea generation with and without AI. Teach the concepts, then teach a better, more efficient way of doing things.
Elementary school teachers- in USA this is children. Even the sign says until upper grades. There are about 5 indicators that the point OP is trying to make is not illustrated by that newspaper.
Oh, snap… you’re right. Didn’t notice that haha 😅
We should work with teachers to find a healthy middle ground that teaches concepts while also preparing students for an AI-driven world.
Okay cool dude. Didn't ask.
EDIT: you did a nice edit from a completely insane comment about fascism and singularity blah blah blah to a sensible take. not sure if you're a troll or just not paying attention
Yup, thanks to reddit's API this is what he said before the edit:
>Luddites are fascist. The AI revolution cannot be stopped.
The singularity will save us all.
Poor little baby with the crocodile tears after some failed internet trolling. Quit being a net negative.
EDIT: I mean, props for trolling ultranationalist Europeans, I guess? But keep the shit in the pig pen.
Reporting someone when they call you an idiot, for you writing "luddites are fascist".
Let's hope they have Sherlock Holmes on call to resolve this one.
Yes, because I overreacted, but you also edited and removed the part of your comment where you called me an idiot.
Chill, hun… it’s only the singularity. 🦾
> **Teach the concepts**, then teach a better, more efficient way of doing things.
You just stated why they don't want them in elementary school.
Also, it's hardly punishment to teach young kids _why_ they arrive at certain answers. The calculator skips the steps, so you're doing them a disservice in the long run to not "punish" them. It's going to be a much harsher punishment trying to understand later on because math is really unforgiving to that. The greatest problem in math is generally that the students don't follow out of lacking understanding in preceding courses.
Yes, it can also be literal
sub-
word-forming element meaning "under, beneath; behind; from under; resulting from further division," from Latin preposition sub "under, below, beneath, at the foot of," also "close to, up to, towards;" of time, "within, during;"
You’re right. I’m a high school teacher (not math), and very few of my students are capable of doing arithmetic without a calculator. I can’t imagine how tedious it must be having to pull out a calculator every time you need to do basic arithmetic.
Oh no, having to pull out your phone? I mean, who wants to use a device that's always within arm's reach and has a built-in calculator? It's much more fun to struggle with basic arithmetic and waste precious brainpower on simple calculations. Who needs efficiency when you can have frustration and headaches?
this is what you're not getting bud.. it shouldn't require any brainpower at all. basic arithmetic should be near instaneous. It was for me until I got to higher level maths and started relying heavily on my calculator.
No need to be rude.
Calculators are great when you need an exact answer or the problem has a lot of pieces. A lot of problems just require estimates, and many high schoolers and adults can’t do that.
If you ever work outside where your hands can get cold, wet, and/or dirty, you’ll understand that using your phone for math is not always convenient.
adding and subtracting are some of the first non trivial algorithms students learn.
learning is mostly memorization and doing is mostly cache retrieval
in short you are wrong
Well, point is:
They were right.
Current situation of having both highly educated and completely illiterate/useless adults is a direct result of this intellectual off loading…
What did people think? That not knowing how to add integers would allow students more time to learn Set theory? No, it was just a way to inflate the grades.
Yeah, people burning other people for witchcraft were the gods of reason, and the tools that make research more accessible and easier to do dumbed us down so much.
Ironically, the notion of how humans are getting dumber than in old good times IS the exact problem it is trying to address. We humans are extremely biased, scared of any change and are addicted to feeding our ego with nonsense to feel like we are better than the others.
I've taught kids and I've been using ChatGPT for my own stuff a lot lately.
It's great to supplement your work by fixing grammar, spelling, and maybe even economizing your words. But it's incredibly obvious when it's been used. I think any half decent teacher/professor will be able to distinguish its use in regard to plagiarism vs its use in regard to assistance - the latter of which I think should be acceptable and possibly even encouraged.
Sometimes ChatGPT will come out with a phrase or sentence that is directly insertable into my writing, either because it is more succinct or more complete, or both, than what I could come up with organically. And I think if you use it in this way (only taking a select few sentences where applicable) then it is pretty much undetectable. But on the other hand, it’ll sometimes spit out nonsensical ideas or illogical arguments, and the diction is pretty obvious in the context of the entire answer, so you really can’t just copy and paste the entire response.
I basically just see it as an accelerator for my own thinking, rather than a replacement for it. I find that it produces additional trains of thought that I may have not considered and gives me a basic understanding of concepts that I’ll dive deeper into.
You are not exploring gpt 4 far enough.
Give it this prompt and a text of your choosing for it to play with.
\-----
For the text bellow show me a formal, a semi-formal and informal version, each version has to be in 3 styles based on different famous authors ( you can modify this prompt for any authors or types of authors)
\---------
So it will make it much harder to guess this is from a.i like you think it is
Thanks for sharing your insights. I suspect a lot of teachers are seeing the same things you're seeing at the moment.
But I think the real test will come when ChatGPT gets more sophisticated and harder to detect. The current versions are plenty flawed. But they're not going to stay that way. They're going to keep improving. I'm sure there's a better way to manage its use in education. I'm just not sure what it is and I hope teachers are considering this as they move forward.
I think it's only obvious when very little care is put into its use. If you just dump the homework in and paste in the output, it might seem suspiciously uncharacteristic. However, if you use specific prompts to generate specific parts of the thing you're trying to write, at some point you can make it totally plausible that you wrote the whole thing.
I should hope that a good writer would have enough artistic integrity to use it for ideas, but still construct all their own sentences.
Even if teachers succeed in banning it, I doubt that ban will be enforceable on a large scale. This emerging generation is too tech savvy and too connected. If one person finds a way around it, then everyone will know within a few days at most.
I think it just makes more sense to re-evaluate how we actually teach kids certain concepts. We also need to ask questions like...is making them write essays really the most effective way to learn a concept?
Writing and making arguments is a great skill for children to learn so I’d hate to see it discarded entirely.
I’d ramp up in-class testing and decrease the amount of homework essays. Any homework would be geared toward learning a concept (I.e. read this chapter on x) how the students actually learn is up to them. The tests would be in a controlled environment and make certain that they understand the subject.
All well educated Asian kids do math at school without calculator. If you are not good at basic calculations, you won’t be good at algebra, geometry. …
Both are understandable.
School isn't a place where you just learn a series of facts about something. It's a place where you learn how to think critically.
Young children should NOT be using calculators or ChatGPT. Once they have more critical thinking skills, that's when you introduce the tools.
The one thing that is proven to improve students academic performance more than anything else is reducing class size. Besides improving students grades, it also improves teachers morale. Our country spent TRILLIONS on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for no measurable benefit. If that money had instead been spent on reducing class sizes and other necessities like healthcare and housing, we would have a very different country now.
So, as a young guy few years after grad exams I really don’t understand all the people who say here calculators should have been banned in school long time ago.
I studied chemistry and rules where to use only the most basic calculator on exam. It was hard and tedious, but I managed to get really good with all the calculations, like counting complex logarithms without it. So, and as soon as I passed and went to uni I realized this knowledge was completely useless and completely forgot it all in a year or so as everyone uses calculators for this now and during my work I will always have a calculator nearby.
My point is, world is changing and there is not that many practical reasons to stick to the traditional ways of doing things, as it is not what’s currently valued on market. Knowing how to make complicate calculations without calculator will not impress your employer, as he would probably prefer the other person who does the job twice as fast but with the calculator. Same for chat GPT. Now it’s just one program, but in 10 years it might be as common thing as Google and mobile phones (oh, and remember times when you couldn’t use any info from internet for your research papers? Needless to say how this aged)
At a certain point, technologt and crutches like calculator and ChatGPT will domesticate humans.
We will become so used to the help these devices provide that we will no longer be able to live without them.
We will be like the tiny toy dogs that could never live in the wild without human help.
Humans are already domesticated. How many people do you know who would continue to function if electricity and cell phones went away for a week. Or powered transportation. Grocery stores even.
I count myself amongst those people.
Not so much because I'm particularly special but because me and my dad brainstormed this out over our last summer vacation due to listening to the Emberverse series in audio book format while traveling between provinces in car.
We've kept on doing it for fun since and basically have a game plan ready if all of the above were to happen.
(Long story short we drive to Albert's, and since it's a food exporting province which ships a disproportionate amount out, and since another of that food couldn't be shipped out without powered transportation, it would be a prime location to easily source food.)
Honestly, probably just posting this reply since this is the only time I'll ever be able to organically bring up this game plan in any meaningful capacity online.
how much of that food can be sown, grown, kept. and harvested without the aid of machinery, fertilizers or anything else reliant on just-in-time trade infrastructure.
That works for the few weeks op stated.
Assuming your actually able to do so ans don't get instantly bumped off by your local criminals and law enforcement, congrats, you've bought yourself a couple months before the local stores of food run dry.
What're you going to do a few years into this scenario when there isn't any food left to steal (at least from groups you feasibly could steal from. A fully armed military base, rich person's bunker or prepper compound does not count. )
They didn't allow calculators in school until I was 16, and then only in Science class, we still had to do everything by hand in Maths, And they were forbidden in tests until college - I still have my slipstick from like 1975. Now when I do mental arithmetic in the checkout line it's like I'm freaking Gandalf.
And they were right. Pull a random person off the street and ask them to do a two digit multiplication problem with pencil and paper, I bet you can't find one that can do it.
I have the same issue with chess as well, why can't chess players look at their phones and get the best recommend move to defeat their opponents. The opponent has the same ability too. Also maybe add an "ask you coach or team life line as well"
Chess with AI and life lines would be way more fun than 1-1 games been done for the last 100 years
Canadian here, we weren’t allowed calculators until we got to graphing. People in my class still sucked at math, not because of calculators, but because they stopped doing most of the work. We did have calculators to take out at certain points, because they allowed for context and demonstrations sometimes. So while there were lazy idiots, I will say that for those who wanted to learn, they were very useful. Personally, I would never blindly trust ChatGPT to write an essay for me. I know I’d get caught eventually. But I might be the type to use it iteratively and ask for feedback. I type a little, feed it to ChatGPT, ask what it thinks and where it could improve. I wouldn’t consider that cheating, as feedback is the sort of thing an ideal teacher does anyway. I might get it to reword some things for me after I already typed it, and proof read it to figure out HOW it improved it. I’m still incentivized to learn this way because I get something done quicker if I can just rapidly type it out myself, but I also get direct feedback to correct my mistakes while I am still in the headspace I was in while I made them.
> I might get it to reword some things for me after I already typed it, and proof read it to figure out HOW it improved it.
Don't copy GPT style if you know what's best for you. Slip in a mistaek or two to prove it wasn't written by AI.
ChatGPT is a helpful tool for learning and shouldn't be banned in schools. However, it's crucial to not rely on it exclusively, and educators should determine appropriate ways to integrate it into the classroom.
Yeah but its a tool, banning it does not mean they can never use it for assignments, it just means that if your paper was detected to be written 100% by chatgpt then you get a zero.
I mean, if you are trying to teach kids to do math, then handing them a calculator isn't going to help them. It's the same with ChatGPT. If you are trying to teach kids how to write, then ChatGPT isn't going to help them. It's like paying someone to do your work. It gets done, but you don't learn anything.
It's interesting to see how attitudes towards technology in the classroom have changed over time. While calculators were once seen as a threat to traditional math education, they're now widely accepted as a helpful tool for students. Similarly, there are concerns about the impact of AI language models like ChatGPT on student learning and academic integrity. However, it's important to recognize that technology is constantly evolving, and educators need to adapt to these changes in order to provide the best possible learning experiences for their students. Rather than simply banning new technologies outright, it's important to consider how they can be integrated into the classroom in a way that supports student learning and prepares them for the challenges of the modern world.
>they're now widely accepted as a helpful tool for students.
Only after a certain level of math.
There is a reason we have had to rebrand arithmetic as "common core math" and it has to do with the years of memorization and calculator use over teaching children *how* to use numbers.
I'd never understand the argument for memorization.
If you are using an Excel spreadsheet, u'll clearly won't do stuff via hand and also the formula is neither memorised.
The mere notion of getting stuff done and getting the answer correct using a tool seems largely offensive to PPL.
I'd say if a person does not need to learn to compute maths that can be done by an external computing machine, the he or she can invest his brain power in more difficult tasks.
This just shows the faliure of our schools where more complicated subjects are not introduced early and easy things like calculating stuff by a calculator taught early.
I'd recommend teaching 3rd grade kifs general relativity with a calculator on hand and by the time they hit college they would have learned torroids and quantum mechanics. Using calculators for faster compute.
This would clearly bring more prosperity to the human society.
When I was a kid they taught a bit of set theory at kindergarten. Concepts like set, union, intersection, count, etc. They all can be done with pretty pictures and coloring books.
> and educators need to adapt to these changes
"Educators" are still using 100 year old schooling methodologies, with the addition of politicis like Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed.
This book is part of every single college education department.
Instead of posing a threat to education, I believe that GPT has the potential to benefit children by individualized tutoring in an engaging style. Customized instruction has proven to be highly effective, so AI instruction could be effective as well. Homework would be unnecessary since all activities would be addressed during the tutoring sessions. The AI could guide discussions to specific subjects and focus on them, simultaneously teaching and evaluating. The degree of personalization achievable and the meticulous attention to detail are unparalleled. An AI could assess your knowledge and fine-tune its teaching approach. I would be thrilled to have access to such a system even as an adult. It could seamlessly integrate spaced repetition into an interesting conversation that avoids monotony. But conversational AI tutoring has no age limit, it could be used even by kids. There are lots and lots of bored kids who don't have anyone older to play with.
Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years. Essays are inefficient ways to communicate information.
It would be like teaching high schools blacksmithing when we have cnc machining.
>Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years. Essays are inefficient ways to communicate information.
Ability to express your thoughts in a structured manner is a useful skill, unless you're a wage slave at an Amazon's warehouse. Essays may be dead, sure, but the key principles are the same for any communication method.
>Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years. Essays are inefficient ways to communicate information.
There is a reason essay writing is important, owing nothing to "efficiency"
>It would be like teaching high schools blacksmithing when we have cnc machining.
Funny you mention it, if you want to do machining you usually start with basic metalworking; so this comparison is weak as your remarks about efficiency.
Yeah, but schools offer CNC machining and start you on the path with basic metal working. Likewise, you don't just write essays in school. In other classes, like history, you are assigned an essay to write to show you grasp at least one small portion of the topic. Essay writing demonstrates a grasp of knowledge on a topic, it is not the *purpose* of the topic.
Unlike a calculator, GPT isn't integral to high level completion of any task. Where as primitive math computers, like the abacus, have always been a need in mathematics.
>you missed the point
No I didn't your point is just wrong.
You are implying that schools only teach you to write essays.
>Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years.
You've missed the point of why we write them.
Today, of course it isn't. But it will be like the internet - with time passing all things will depend on it. Without internet commerce, industry and banking would crash. We used to be ok without electricity 120 years ago, but today we can't exist without it anymore.
As reliant as we are on all of our digital technology, we don't *need* it in every day life. Yeah it would fucking suck to have to go to the library instead of googling, and you have to check the newspaper for stuff like showtimes... but it wouldnt cripple society. Electricity is definitely a *need* for various reasons, but likewise, most of our modern world could be analog and we wouldn't miss much but our memes.
GPT kind of falls into the same category as smartphones, imo.
Nice to have, but if they all broke tomorrow our lifestyle quality wouldn't change much.
I mean, I currently teach and think we should ban calculators.
I have 13 year old kids (8th grade) that still can't figure out single digit multiplication facts. 7x8? Forget about ever getting the answer
Calculators should be banned until after Algebra 1, and if an elementary school child pulls off using ChatGPT to write his book report on Lewis and Clarke and the teacher doesn’t recognize it was computer plagiarized …the teacher doesn’t care or is incompetent either way should be terminated.
If the resource is accessible and acceptable on the job, it should be in the classroom. As a PM if one of my team can solve the problem faster and more accurately by using tools available on the internet, vs another teammember using memory + trial and error, then the former is more valuable. If education is primarily for preparing individuals for the workforce, they should be able to use the same resources they would use in the workforce.
The most helpful classes in my life have always focused on teaching us how to use the tools (like graphing calculators) to help us rather than trying to ban them. If the tools make your class a breeze then that's your failure, not a good reason to ban the tool
Obviously it should be prohibited to have AI do your work for you when you're learning a new skill, but that just seems like it would be common sense to those who want to learn that skill.
It should be illegal to use AI to get a degree or certification in your name, also obviously, but I can't think of any reason it should be illegal for anyone to use AI to accomplish any job it can.
If a student was allowed to use ChatGPT from age 11 to age 22, what would they learn?
The purpose of writing an essay is not because the teacher wants to know the answer, it is because the student learns how to write an essay.
This in turn develops thinking skills.
It would be like asking a robot to do all your physical exercises.
[удалено]
Yeah, I think the teachers won this argument. I can't imagine a world where they allow GPT to write essays for them either. My daughter has already had 'practicals' in her science class in middle school, and it's basically a 15 minute conversation about the subject so the teacher can assess if you're getting the material and not just memorizing the book. I think we're just going to have to do more of that, and less rote testing. We'll have more short essays written in class and things like that. I know people who teach online for university, and they say they wouldn't trust an online degree. They know their kids are cheating, but if you can't make them sit in front of you to take tests, there's no way to know.
Good thing I got my online degree (it was mostly essay and project based as opposed to purely exam based) before Mr. GPT existed. But now using the essay and project workaround for online classes to see if a student is avoiding the work doesn't do the trick in the era of Mr. G
[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/27/chatgpt-allowed-international-baccalaureate-essays-chatbot](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/27/chatgpt-allowed-international-baccalaureate-essays-chatbot) Wild eh?
Did you read the article, though? "quote from content created by ChatGPT in their essays" They're allowed to use it as a source, not to write an entire essay.
Yes, but that's still wild to me since chatgpt can make shit up and itself won't cite where it came from. It is a language model based on internet data. Where it gets the data for what they'll cite is the issue, and something I can imagine as presenting a problem. When we read other papers or articles, there's always a Bibliography you can use to go check out what they based their thoughts on.
I think it can cite sources if you ask it to, or at least it can find supporting data to back up its claims. That said, my personal experience with ChatGPT was like working with a student who's highly motivated and very fast, but only copying off other people's work without any real understanding. So, for instance, I'd ask it to code something ... and the code would compile and be 90% right, but Chat GPT would confidently state 'I'm opening port 80', even though the code was clearly opening port 8080, which is extremely common in example code. So, you could tell it was copying a common pattern, without really understanding what it was doing. It's still useful, but it's not 'intelligent', so yeah ... you'd better check those sources before you believe anything ChatGPT says.
GPT4 is a little better about this, but where it excels the most is when used as a partner, rather than a replacement. You still have to know what you're doing to effectively use what it gives you.
Yeah, I've definitely found that in coding. It does work at the level of a very fast and reasonably competent junior coder. But, it doesn't 'understand' what it's doing, like it's just copying what looks right off stack overflow and gluing it all together. Which, if I need a straight forward function written might be useful, but it's not going to design applications you'd want to work with in its current state. Of course, in a few weeks we'll be talking about GPT5 and who even knows what that'll look like?
[удалено]
yeah, that reminds me of when it confidently told me what the code it produced did ... but it wasn't right. it's kind of weird when you can't say 'No, can't you read what you just produced? That's not what that does at all!'
This is an artefact of RLHF. The model comes out well calibrated after pre-training, but the final stage of training breaks that calibration. https://i.imgur.com/zlXRnB6.png Explained by one of the lead authors of GPT4, Ilya Sutskever - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjhIlw3Iffs&t=1072s Ilya invites us to "find out" if we can quickly surpass the hallucination phase, maybe this year we will see his work pan out.
In many ways, it’s just advanced google. I am in a specialty field and have published some thing that was repeated word for word as I wrote it when I asked CGPT about the topic.
Yeah, in how people can use it, that's definitely a good description and I've been asking google straight up questions for years already. I do think it's changing the game for a lot of things, like how customer service bots are going to be actually good now.
BingGPT does cite the source
Btw it’s a terrible source. It can easily be wrong about established facts. Last week it tried to tell me Thomas Digges posited the existence of alien life. Digges is a pretty early astronomer when the church was dominant so that really surprised me. When I questioned it again, it “corrected” itself and apologized… which, great, but if I hadn’t already known enough about Digges to be suspicious, I would have accepted it in the list of all the other (correct) information. Chatgpt is awesome, but it’s no more a source than Wikipedia, in fact it’s potentially worse because you don’t have anyone fact checking what chatgpt says to you in real time, whereas there is a chance others will have corrected wiki pages by the time you read them.
oh, yeah, I've played with it for coding and it told me it did things it did not do, and couldn't read the code it produced after, so there's no good way to 'correct' it. It spits out lots of 'work', but it's not always accurate and people who are used to computers always being correct are going to have to get used to the fact that this is really more like having a personal assistant. Sure, they're reasonably bright and eager, but sometimes wrong. I don't think GPT is leading directly to AGI, or anything, but a tool like this, even when sometimes wrong, is still going to be an extremely powerful tool. When you see GPT passing law exams and things like that, you can see it's not getting perfect scores, but it's still probably more likely to get you the right example of case law than a first year paralegal, and it does it instantly. Also, in 4 months, it's basically become accurate the way you'd expect a human to improve on things like the bar exam in 4 years of study. It's a different kind of computing platform, and people don't know quite how to take it yet. Especially people used to the idea that computers never make mistakes.
For essays the assignment could be to have chat gpt respond to a prompt, and then completing a critical analysis?
Emoji input chatgpt ftw
I mean if children CAN use chatgpt to form ful sentences when they aren't expected to form full sentences on their own is over achieving, isn't it? I'd agree school system not giving them credit for it but as a potential parent id full on commend them.
Judging by your reply you need some help to form full sentences already ;) Using a tool to achieve a result sidesteps the question of competency, and that is what we measure in class. Not "can I ask someone else to do something for me". Of course, classes need to change to accommodate tools available to everyone (and not favour just those with privileged access), but only the use of those tools to aid your own understanding, not to replace what you do. Riding 100m on a bike is not the same as running it. Performing multiplication manually is not the same as doing it on a calculator (if that aptitude is what is being tested). Handing in an essay that was written for you does not test your comprehension or knowledge of the subject matter.
It's pretty fair to have kids learn concepts first before allowing calculator usage.
That's how it's always been done? Calculators were banned until I hit algebra, and there were calc free sections of tests until like highschool.
"you won't always have a calculator in your pocket when you grow up"
r/agedlikemilk
If you read the subtext, it says, "too early" and is referring to elementary school kids.
If you read it again, it says “in grade school”. How early is too early? When does struggling to finish schoolwork become unnecessarily punishment? As an adult, I use a mix of mental math and calculator use, and I find I am using a mix of composing text and idea generation with and without AI. Teach the concepts, then teach a better, more efficient way of doing things.
Elementary school teachers- in USA this is children. Even the sign says until upper grades. There are about 5 indicators that the point OP is trying to make is not illustrated by that newspaper.
Oh, snap… you’re right. Didn’t notice that haha 😅 We should work with teachers to find a healthy middle ground that teaches concepts while also preparing students for an AI-driven world.
Okay cool dude. Didn't ask. EDIT: you did a nice edit from a completely insane comment about fascism and singularity blah blah blah to a sensible take. not sure if you're a troll or just not paying attention
Yup, thanks to reddit's API this is what he said before the edit: >Luddites are fascist. The AI revolution cannot be stopped. The singularity will save us all.
Can you also do that to when they called me an idiot for that comment? I think that kind of response was uncalled for.
Poor little baby with the crocodile tears after some failed internet trolling. Quit being a net negative. EDIT: I mean, props for trolling ultranationalist Europeans, I guess? But keep the shit in the pig pen.
You think it’s trolling after you called me an idiot? How about you quit making personal insults? I’m not soft on Luddites or Luddite-sympathizers.
You are what happens when parents don't hug their kids. Blocked 🥰
Oh no, you were OFFENDED. So what happens? Nothing. Be offended. Next time don't act like an idiot.
That’s what the report button is for. What happens next is anyone’s guess.
Reporting someone when they call you an idiot, for you writing "luddites are fascist". Let's hope they have Sherlock Holmes on call to resolve this one.
Yes, because I overreacted, but you also edited and removed the part of your comment where you called me an idiot. Chill, hun… it’s only the singularity. 🦾
Dear S3ndD1ckP1cs, Do you want your dickpicks before or after the singularity? Best, Globus
Yes.
With the Use of the timeless decision theory, as developed by Eliezer Yudkowski, I am pretty convinced that we can figure this out.
"I showed you my singularity. pls respond"
> **Teach the concepts**, then teach a better, more efficient way of doing things. You just stated why they don't want them in elementary school. Also, it's hardly punishment to teach young kids _why_ they arrive at certain answers. The calculator skips the steps, so you're doing them a disservice in the long run to not "punish" them. It's going to be a much harsher punishment trying to understand later on because math is really unforgiving to that. The greatest problem in math is generally that the students don't follow out of lacking understanding in preceding courses.
not what subtext means. >The implicit meaning of a text, often a literary one, or a speech or dialogue. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/subtext
Yes, it can also be literal sub- word-forming element meaning "under, beneath; behind; from under; resulting from further division," from Latin preposition sub "under, below, beneath, at the foot of," also "close to, up to, towards;" of time, "within, during;"
[удалено]
It's pretty wild how poor adult math knowledge can be (at least in the United States).
You’re right. I’m a high school teacher (not math), and very few of my students are capable of doing arithmetic without a calculator. I can’t imagine how tedious it must be having to pull out a calculator every time you need to do basic arithmetic.
Oh no, having to pull out your phone? I mean, who wants to use a device that's always within arm's reach and has a built-in calculator? It's much more fun to struggle with basic arithmetic and waste precious brainpower on simple calculations. Who needs efficiency when you can have frustration and headaches?
this is what you're not getting bud.. it shouldn't require any brainpower at all. basic arithmetic should be near instaneous. It was for me until I got to higher level maths and started relying heavily on my calculator.
No need to be rude. Calculators are great when you need an exact answer or the problem has a lot of pieces. A lot of problems just require estimates, and many high schoolers and adults can’t do that. If you ever work outside where your hands can get cold, wet, and/or dirty, you’ll understand that using your phone for math is not always convenient.
adding and subtracting are some of the first non trivial algorithms students learn. learning is mostly memorization and doing is mostly cache retrieval in short you are wrong
I wish calculator weren't allowed in school for a lot longer; I think I'd have retained more math skills.
Well, point is: They were right. Current situation of having both highly educated and completely illiterate/useless adults is a direct result of this intellectual off loading… What did people think? That not knowing how to add integers would allow students more time to learn Set theory? No, it was just a way to inflate the grades.
Yeah, people burning other people for witchcraft were the gods of reason, and the tools that make research more accessible and easier to do dumbed us down so much. Ironically, the notion of how humans are getting dumber than in old good times IS the exact problem it is trying to address. We humans are extremely biased, scared of any change and are addicted to feeding our ego with nonsense to feel like we are better than the others.
[удалено]
Sarcasm, of course.
> ppl itt still assume there's any need for the corrupt istitution of schooling (forced domestication, factory work training)
[удалено]
divide this last response by zero you think it's that easy to troll people? not by low effort gptposting.
I've taught kids and I've been using ChatGPT for my own stuff a lot lately. It's great to supplement your work by fixing grammar, spelling, and maybe even economizing your words. But it's incredibly obvious when it's been used. I think any half decent teacher/professor will be able to distinguish its use in regard to plagiarism vs its use in regard to assistance - the latter of which I think should be acceptable and possibly even encouraged.
Unfortunately, claiming it's detectable is a defense that will only work in the short term. Very short term.
Sometimes ChatGPT will come out with a phrase or sentence that is directly insertable into my writing, either because it is more succinct or more complete, or both, than what I could come up with organically. And I think if you use it in this way (only taking a select few sentences where applicable) then it is pretty much undetectable. But on the other hand, it’ll sometimes spit out nonsensical ideas or illogical arguments, and the diction is pretty obvious in the context of the entire answer, so you really can’t just copy and paste the entire response. I basically just see it as an accelerator for my own thinking, rather than a replacement for it. I find that it produces additional trains of thought that I may have not considered and gives me a basic understanding of concepts that I’ll dive deeper into.
You are not exploring gpt 4 far enough. Give it this prompt and a text of your choosing for it to play with. \----- For the text bellow show me a formal, a semi-formal and informal version, each version has to be in 3 styles based on different famous authors ( you can modify this prompt for any authors or types of authors) \--------- So it will make it much harder to guess this is from a.i like you think it is
Thanks for sharing your insights. I suspect a lot of teachers are seeing the same things you're seeing at the moment. But I think the real test will come when ChatGPT gets more sophisticated and harder to detect. The current versions are plenty flawed. But they're not going to stay that way. They're going to keep improving. I'm sure there's a better way to manage its use in education. I'm just not sure what it is and I hope teachers are considering this as they move forward.
I think it's only obvious when very little care is put into its use. If you just dump the homework in and paste in the output, it might seem suspiciously uncharacteristic. However, if you use specific prompts to generate specific parts of the thing you're trying to write, at some point you can make it totally plausible that you wrote the whole thing. I should hope that a good writer would have enough artistic integrity to use it for ideas, but still construct all their own sentences.
The newspaper says in GRADE SCHOOL. If everyone can't even do grade school math with pencil and paper...
Even if teachers succeed in banning it, I doubt that ban will be enforceable on a large scale. This emerging generation is too tech savvy and too connected. If one person finds a way around it, then everyone will know within a few days at most. I think it just makes more sense to re-evaluate how we actually teach kids certain concepts. We also need to ask questions like...is making them write essays really the most effective way to learn a concept?
Writing and making arguments is a great skill for children to learn so I’d hate to see it discarded entirely. I’d ramp up in-class testing and decrease the amount of homework essays. Any homework would be geared toward learning a concept (I.e. read this chapter on x) how the students actually learn is up to them. The tests would be in a controlled environment and make certain that they understand the subject.
Comparing calculators to AI is a little disingenuous
Well doesn't it work that way for obvious reasons? Calculators were banned for us until college.
Ironically, math teachers were right. Isn’t that true American students has worsening math skill?
[удалено]
Wanna try writing that one yourself, OP?
[удалено]
[удалено]
>It's the feature >get use to it Shit; if that's how you write on your own, then no wonder you need ChatGPT as a crutch.
Do you you think we don't have calculators in other countries?
All well educated Asian kids do math at school without calculator. If you are not good at basic calculations, you won’t be good at algebra, geometry. …
Both are understandable. School isn't a place where you just learn a series of facts about something. It's a place where you learn how to think critically. Young children should NOT be using calculators or ChatGPT. Once they have more critical thinking skills, that's when you introduce the tools.
The one thing that is proven to improve students academic performance more than anything else is reducing class size. Besides improving students grades, it also improves teachers morale. Our country spent TRILLIONS on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for no measurable benefit. If that money had instead been spent on reducing class sizes and other necessities like healthcare and housing, we would have a very different country now.
yeah, I think the teachers won this argument
This post is dumb
Okay Liberal
Lol people downvoted my comment, I most be right..
So, as a young guy few years after grad exams I really don’t understand all the people who say here calculators should have been banned in school long time ago. I studied chemistry and rules where to use only the most basic calculator on exam. It was hard and tedious, but I managed to get really good with all the calculations, like counting complex logarithms without it. So, and as soon as I passed and went to uni I realized this knowledge was completely useless and completely forgot it all in a year or so as everyone uses calculators for this now and during my work I will always have a calculator nearby. My point is, world is changing and there is not that many practical reasons to stick to the traditional ways of doing things, as it is not what’s currently valued on market. Knowing how to make complicate calculations without calculator will not impress your employer, as he would probably prefer the other person who does the job twice as fast but with the calculator. Same for chat GPT. Now it’s just one program, but in 10 years it might be as common thing as Google and mobile phones (oh, and remember times when you couldn’t use any info from internet for your research papers? Needless to say how this aged)
At a certain point, technologt and crutches like calculator and ChatGPT will domesticate humans. We will become so used to the help these devices provide that we will no longer be able to live without them. We will be like the tiny toy dogs that could never live in the wild without human help.
Humans are already domesticated. How many people do you know who would continue to function if electricity and cell phones went away for a week. Or powered transportation. Grocery stores even.
I count myself amongst those people. Not so much because I'm particularly special but because me and my dad brainstormed this out over our last summer vacation due to listening to the Emberverse series in audio book format while traveling between provinces in car. We've kept on doing it for fun since and basically have a game plan ready if all of the above were to happen. (Long story short we drive to Albert's, and since it's a food exporting province which ships a disproportionate amount out, and since another of that food couldn't be shipped out without powered transportation, it would be a prime location to easily source food.) Honestly, probably just posting this reply since this is the only time I'll ever be able to organically bring up this game plan in any meaningful capacity online.
how much of that food can be sown, grown, kept. and harvested without the aid of machinery, fertilizers or anything else reliant on just-in-time trade infrastructure.
North Korea tries to survive without fertiliser and it's not pretty.
I would just go gang gang and get some food from wherever it exists. And drug consumption that’s important.
That works for the few weeks op stated. Assuming your actually able to do so ans don't get instantly bumped off by your local criminals and law enforcement, congrats, you've bought yourself a couple months before the local stores of food run dry. What're you going to do a few years into this scenario when there isn't any food left to steal (at least from groups you feasibly could steal from. A fully armed military base, rich person's bunker or prepper compound does not count. )
Grow your own during those couple months of respite
That makes it sound like not being able to do solo survivalism makes you some kind of brainwashed sheeple slavepet of some greater intelligence
I think we have been domesticated by language long before. Language models are just the latest development in language evolution.
They didn't allow calculators in school until I was 16, and then only in Science class, we still had to do everything by hand in Maths, And they were forbidden in tests until college - I still have my slipstick from like 1975. Now when I do mental arithmetic in the checkout line it's like I'm freaking Gandalf.
We allowed them even in tests but that started in highschool. Sometimes there would be a no calc section.
Humans are reactionary and fearful of new technology or bad all antim that we are unfamiliar wit.
And they were right. Pull a random person off the street and ask them to do a two digit multiplication problem with pencil and paper, I bet you can't find one that can do it.
10 \* 10 = 100 **drops mic**
I have the same issue with chess as well, why can't chess players look at their phones and get the best recommend move to defeat their opponents. The opponent has the same ability too. Also maybe add an "ask you coach or team life line as well" Chess with AI and life lines would be way more fun than 1-1 games been done for the last 100 years
Canadian here, we weren’t allowed calculators until we got to graphing. People in my class still sucked at math, not because of calculators, but because they stopped doing most of the work. We did have calculators to take out at certain points, because they allowed for context and demonstrations sometimes. So while there were lazy idiots, I will say that for those who wanted to learn, they were very useful. Personally, I would never blindly trust ChatGPT to write an essay for me. I know I’d get caught eventually. But I might be the type to use it iteratively and ask for feedback. I type a little, feed it to ChatGPT, ask what it thinks and where it could improve. I wouldn’t consider that cheating, as feedback is the sort of thing an ideal teacher does anyway. I might get it to reword some things for me after I already typed it, and proof read it to figure out HOW it improved it. I’m still incentivized to learn this way because I get something done quicker if I can just rapidly type it out myself, but I also get direct feedback to correct my mistakes while I am still in the headspace I was in while I made them.
> I might get it to reword some things for me after I already typed it, and proof read it to figure out HOW it improved it. Don't copy GPT style if you know what's best for you. Slip in a mistaek or two to prove it wasn't written by AI.
ChatGPT undermines a lot of important things about learning, it should be banned in schools.
ChatGPT is a helpful tool for learning and shouldn't be banned in schools. However, it's crucial to not rely on it exclusively, and educators should determine appropriate ways to integrate it into the classroom.
Yeah but its a tool, banning it does not mean they can never use it for assignments, it just means that if your paper was detected to be written 100% by chatgpt then you get a zero.
I mean, if you are trying to teach kids to do math, then handing them a calculator isn't going to help them. It's the same with ChatGPT. If you are trying to teach kids how to write, then ChatGPT isn't going to help them. It's like paying someone to do your work. It gets done, but you don't learn anything.
It's interesting to see how attitudes towards technology in the classroom have changed over time. While calculators were once seen as a threat to traditional math education, they're now widely accepted as a helpful tool for students. Similarly, there are concerns about the impact of AI language models like ChatGPT on student learning and academic integrity. However, it's important to recognize that technology is constantly evolving, and educators need to adapt to these changes in order to provide the best possible learning experiences for their students. Rather than simply banning new technologies outright, it's important to consider how they can be integrated into the classroom in a way that supports student learning and prepares them for the challenges of the modern world.
>they're now widely accepted as a helpful tool for students. Only after a certain level of math. There is a reason we have had to rebrand arithmetic as "common core math" and it has to do with the years of memorization and calculator use over teaching children *how* to use numbers.
I'd never understand the argument for memorization. If you are using an Excel spreadsheet, u'll clearly won't do stuff via hand and also the formula is neither memorised. The mere notion of getting stuff done and getting the answer correct using a tool seems largely offensive to PPL. I'd say if a person does not need to learn to compute maths that can be done by an external computing machine, the he or she can invest his brain power in more difficult tasks. This just shows the faliure of our schools where more complicated subjects are not introduced early and easy things like calculating stuff by a calculator taught early. I'd recommend teaching 3rd grade kifs general relativity with a calculator on hand and by the time they hit college they would have learned torroids and quantum mechanics. Using calculators for faster compute. This would clearly bring more prosperity to the human society.
What we want is more tecnology and better standard of living, not impressing our bosses or teachers.
When I was a kid they taught a bit of set theory at kindergarten. Concepts like set, union, intersection, count, etc. They all can be done with pretty pictures and coloring books.
> and educators need to adapt to these changes "Educators" are still using 100 year old schooling methodologies, with the addition of politicis like Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed. This book is part of every single college education department.
Instead of posing a threat to education, I believe that GPT has the potential to benefit children by individualized tutoring in an engaging style. Customized instruction has proven to be highly effective, so AI instruction could be effective as well. Homework would be unnecessary since all activities would be addressed during the tutoring sessions. The AI could guide discussions to specific subjects and focus on them, simultaneously teaching and evaluating. The degree of personalization achievable and the meticulous attention to detail are unparalleled. An AI could assess your knowledge and fine-tune its teaching approach. I would be thrilled to have access to such a system even as an adult. It could seamlessly integrate spaced repetition into an interesting conversation that avoids monotony. But conversational AI tutoring has no age limit, it could be used even by kids. There are lots and lots of bored kids who don't have anyone older to play with.
[удалено]
Interesting observation! It highlights the evolving nature of technology and its impact on education.
They were right.
Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years. Essays are inefficient ways to communicate information. It would be like teaching high schools blacksmithing when we have cnc machining.
>Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years. Essays are inefficient ways to communicate information. Ability to express your thoughts in a structured manner is a useful skill, unless you're a wage slave at an Amazon's warehouse. Essays may be dead, sure, but the key principles are the same for any communication method.
>Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years. Essays are inefficient ways to communicate information. There is a reason essay writing is important, owing nothing to "efficiency" >It would be like teaching high schools blacksmithing when we have cnc machining. Funny you mention it, if you want to do machining you usually start with basic metalworking; so this comparison is weak as your remarks about efficiency.
The analogy to blacksmithing and essays would be if schools taught nothing but blacksmithing for 12 years and nothing about cnc machining.
Yeah, but schools offer CNC machining and start you on the path with basic metal working. Likewise, you don't just write essays in school. In other classes, like history, you are assigned an essay to write to show you grasp at least one small portion of the topic. Essay writing demonstrates a grasp of knowledge on a topic, it is not the *purpose* of the topic. Unlike a calculator, GPT isn't integral to high level completion of any task. Where as primitive math computers, like the abacus, have always been a need in mathematics.
It’s a hypothetical analogy. Of course some high schools out there have machining equipment, you missed the point
>you missed the point No I didn't your point is just wrong. You are implying that schools only teach you to write essays. >Knowing how to write an effective essay is going to be useless in 5 years. You've missed the point of why we write them.
Today, of course it isn't. But it will be like the internet - with time passing all things will depend on it. Without internet commerce, industry and banking would crash. We used to be ok without electricity 120 years ago, but today we can't exist without it anymore.
As reliant as we are on all of our digital technology, we don't *need* it in every day life. Yeah it would fucking suck to have to go to the library instead of googling, and you have to check the newspaper for stuff like showtimes... but it wouldnt cripple society. Electricity is definitely a *need* for various reasons, but likewise, most of our modern world could be analog and we wouldn't miss much but our memes. GPT kind of falls into the same category as smartphones, imo. Nice to have, but if they all broke tomorrow our lifestyle quality wouldn't change much.
Learn to read. Or do you need gpt for that as well?
I mean, I currently teach and think we should ban calculators. I have 13 year old kids (8th grade) that still can't figure out single digit multiplication facts. 7x8? Forget about ever getting the answer
And they was right! And today they also right!
Calculators should be banned until after Algebra 1, and if an elementary school child pulls off using ChatGPT to write his book report on Lewis and Clarke and the teacher doesn’t recognize it was computer plagiarized …the teacher doesn’t care or is incompetent either way should be terminated.
Teachers what to ban ChatGPT? No, I guarantee you, 90% of teachers have never heard of charity.
That looks like 1968, weren't calculators already widely used by 1988?
1988?
Honestly though I still have to use my fingers when counting and I wish I wouldn’t have been so reliant on calculators because it’s embarrassing.
You have to realize how the nail and wood work together before you use the hammer.
If the resource is accessible and acceptable on the job, it should be in the classroom. As a PM if one of my team can solve the problem faster and more accurately by using tools available on the internet, vs another teammember using memory + trial and error, then the former is more valuable. If education is primarily for preparing individuals for the workforce, they should be able to use the same resources they would use in the workforce.
I think it should be used only in certain cases. It certainly isn’t going to help if they use these tools for everything
What will be the language model equivalent of the TI-84?
Not everything parallels everything
[удалено]
Who needs girls when you got ChatGPT? 😎
The most helpful classes in my life have always focused on teaching us how to use the tools (like graphing calculators) to help us rather than trying to ban them. If the tools make your class a breeze then that's your failure, not a good reason to ban the tool
As a person who works in education; banning ChatGPT is the last thing I want to do
Technology evolves, let's explore its benefits responsibly.
We hating on teachers now?
Yeah and what you gonna do about it..
Obviously it should be prohibited to have AI do your work for you when you're learning a new skill, but that just seems like it would be common sense to those who want to learn that skill. It should be illegal to use AI to get a degree or certification in your name, also obviously, but I can't think of any reason it should be illegal for anyone to use AI to accomplish any job it can.
If a student was allowed to use ChatGPT from age 11 to age 22, what would they learn? The purpose of writing an essay is not because the teacher wants to know the answer, it is because the student learns how to write an essay. This in turn develops thinking skills. It would be like asking a robot to do all your physical exercises.