5 ms·

Is this cheating? It sounds like cheating and reflects quite poorly on you.

thewakalix 3y ago
> It was our first comp sci class ever, we were given raspberry pi's. We had no coding experience or guidance, and were asked to create "something". Garbage in, garbage out.
- addicted 3y ago
  Wow this is such an awful excuse. Here’s a whole list of projects intended for kids. https://all3dp.com/2/best-raspberry-pi-projects-for-kids/ https://all3dp.com/2/best-raspberry-pi-projects-for-kids/ It includes building out a whole weather station which includes a humidity sensor as one of the many things it can do.
  - unionpivo 3y ago
    > Wow this is such an awful excuse. yes for whomever organized such a curse and didn't give such guidance. And besides curse asked for project to do something. It did. It printed lines. We can call the email gimmick, the marketeering strategy, making a turd look good. Don't blame students for failure of whomever designed the curse.
    - addicted 3y ago
      So did they disclose that all the Pi did was printed lines? The problem with the email isn’t it’s a gimmick etc. it’s that it appears quite clear that the students created the impression that it was the Pi doing it. Your excuse that it’s difficult for first year college students with no coding experience to do something useful with the Rapberry Pi is disproven by the fact that there exist many extremely useful projects that kids with no coding experience can do, so college students almost certainly should be able to do without needing to resort to gimmicks. So I don’t understand your complaints about the course. It’s clearly not too hard which is what you’re implying. And if you’re suggesting that the wording for the project wasn’t clear enough then that’s a huge claim to make considering you don’t know what the wording was. Also, college (at least in the U.S.) was never about playing funny word games with the professor. There’s a level of maturity, reasonableness, and respect that is expected of the students. None of which is indicated in the response here.
      - awesomeMilou 3y ago
        > There’s a level of maturity, reasonableness, and respect that is expected of the students. Given that the general teaching style of colleges isn't unique to the US, and based on my experience throughout my degree at a similar institution, I somehow doubt that statement. > It’s clearly not too hard which is what you’re implying. It sounded like the students received literally no guidance, in the way the course is described. These types of assignments usually result in those with previous programming experience showing off their skills, while the actual rookie students are left in the mud. I.e. an assignment that targets the top 20% of the class. Regardless, to my knowledge I never cheated during my college degree, but I can't hold it against people that do. Criticism such as yours disregards the reality that students face, pressure to graduate with good marks and whatnot. Not cheating will put you at an disadvantage, because your competition is actively doing so and they are already skewing the marks that way. If the intention of the assignment was to identify honest work, it was certainly structured wrong (as a required submission would have eliminated the cheaters).
    - meiraleal 3y ago
      That's another issue going on: you using your cheating to belittle Google scan which again plays against any ethical ground you might still had
- klntsky 3y ago
  More like cheaters in, cheaters out.
- latency-guy2 3y ago
  Creativity is a good thing, sad to see trust abused this way.
- nullc 3y ago
  It's plausible to me that they weren't provided with what they needed precisely because pervasive cheating allowed their predecessor classmates to complete the assignments.
Jagerbizzle 3y ago
It certainly reflects poorly on the institution for not requiring anything other than a dog and pony show for grading.
lizard 3y ago
This can depend a lot on the context, which we don't have a lot of. Looking at this a different way, they gave first-year students, likely with no established pre-requistites, an open-ended project with fixed hardware but no expectation to submit the final project for review. If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with the source code. A project like this was likely intended to get the students to think about the "what" and not worry so much about the "how." Faking it entirely may have gone a bit further than intended, but would still meet the goal of getting the students to think about what they could do with this computer (if they knew how) While university instructors can vastly underestimate student's creativity, they are, generally speaking, not stupid. At the very least, they know if you don't tell students to submit their work, you can often count on them doing as little as possible.
- godelski 3y ago
  > If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with the source code. Wait, is your argument honestly "it's not cheating because they just trusted the students"? There's a huge difference between demoing something as "this is what we did" vs "we didn't quite get there, but this is what we're envisioning." Edit: You all are responding very weirdly. The cheating is because you're presenting "something" that is not that thing. Put a dog in a dress and call it a pretty woman and I'll call you a conman.
  - lizard 3y ago
    No, the argument is, "It's not cheating because it wasn't a programming assignment."
  - joshspankit 3y ago
    No, it’s not cheating because the ask was “something” not “some program”
    - addicted 3y ago
Uptrenda 3y ago
I'd call it cheating too but yeah. I like the pi and sensors though. Sounds like the start of something cool. Wish I could get a product like this to put in my roof to detect leaks. That would be useful.
elwell 3y ago
Of course it's cheating
Kuraj 3y ago
Kind of? Yes but they still demonstrated as much as was expected from them, which was very little to begin with.
whatever1 3y ago
BS. The CEO of one of the largest public companies just did it and he is fine. Board and shareholders all happy.
- theGnuMe 3y ago
  I gleefully await Matt Levine’s article on AI demos as securities fraud.
- meiraleal 3y ago
  Well done, you're halfway to secure a job at Google, no eh ethics/morals needed.
frail_figure 3y ago
The view up on that high horse must be interesting! Were you the kid who reminded teachers about homework? Literally all that matters is that they passed.
- gardenhedge 3y ago
  > Were you the kid who reminded teachers about homework? Are you trying to bully me or something? Not going to work with me. You've revealed your poor character with that comment.
icedchai 3y ago
If the teacher was competent, they would've asked to see the code.
Moomoomoo309 3y ago
It depends on what the intention of the assignment was. If it was primarily to help the students understand what these devices _could_ be used for, then it's fine. If it was to have them actually do it, well, then the professor should have at least tried to verify that. Given that it's for first-years who have no experience programming, it really could be either.
JohnFen 3y ago
It's very obviously cheating. They didn't do what the assignment asked.

> It was our first comp sci class ever, we were given raspberry pi's. We had no coding experience or guidance, and were asked to create "something". Garbage in, garbage out.

addicted 3y ago
Wow this is such an awful excuse. Here’s a whole list of projects intended for kids. https://all3dp.com/2/best-raspberry-pi-projects-for-kids/ https://all3dp.com/2/best-raspberry-pi-projects-for-kids/ It includes building out a whole weather station which includes a humidity sensor as one of the many things it can do.
- unionpivo 3y ago
  > Wow this is such an awful excuse. yes for whomever organized such a curse and didn't give such guidance. And besides curse asked for project to do something. It did. It printed lines. We can call the email gimmick, the marketeering strategy, making a turd look good. Don't blame students for failure of whomever designed the curse.
  - addicted 3y ago
    So did they disclose that all the Pi did was printed lines? The problem with the email isn’t it’s a gimmick etc. it’s that it appears quite clear that the students created the impression that it was the Pi doing it. Your excuse that it’s difficult for first year college students with no coding experience to do something useful with the Rapberry Pi is disproven by the fact that there exist many extremely useful projects that kids with no coding experience can do, so college students almost certainly should be able to do without needing to resort to gimmicks. So I don’t understand your complaints about the course. It’s clearly not too hard which is what you’re implying. And if you’re suggesting that the wording for the project wasn’t clear enough then that’s a huge claim to make considering you don’t know what the wording was. Also, college (at least in the U.S.) was never about playing funny word games with the professor. There’s a level of maturity, reasonableness, and respect that is expected of the students. None of which is indicated in the response here.
    - awesomeMilou 3y ago
      > There’s a level of maturity, reasonableness, and respect that is expected of the students. Given that the general teaching style of colleges isn't unique to the US, and based on my experience throughout my degree at a similar institution, I somehow doubt that statement. > It’s clearly not too hard which is what you’re implying. It sounded like the students received literally no guidance, in the way the course is described. These types of assignments usually result in those with previous programming experience showing off their skills, while the actual rookie students are left in the mud. I.e. an assignment that targets the top 20% of the class. Regardless, to my knowledge I never cheated during my college degree, but I can't hold it against people that do. Criticism such as yours disregards the reality that students face, pressure to graduate with good marks and whatnot. Not cheating will put you at an disadvantage, because your competition is actively doing so and they are already skewing the marks that way. If the intention of the assignment was to identify honest work, it was certainly structured wrong (as a required submission would have eliminated the cheaters).
  - meiraleal 3y ago
    That's another issue going on: you using your cheating to belittle Google scan which again plays against any ethical ground you might still had
klntsky 3y ago
More like cheaters in, cheaters out.
latency-guy2 3y ago
Creativity is a good thing, sad to see trust abused this way.
nullc 3y ago
It's plausible to me that they weren't provided with what they needed precisely because pervasive cheating allowed their predecessor classmates to complete the assignments.

Jagerbizzle 3y ago

It certainly reflects poorly on the institution for not requiring anything other than a dog and pony show for grading.

lizard 3y ago

This can depend a lot on the context, which we don't have a lot of. Looking at this a different way, they gave first-year students, likely with no established pre-requistites, an open-ended project with fixed hardware but no expectation to submit the final project for review. If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with the source code. A project like this was likely intended to get the students to think about the "what" and not worry so much about the "how." Faking it entirely may have gone a bit further than intended, but would still meet the goal of getting the students to think about what they could do with this computer (if they knew how) While university instructors can vastly underestimate student's creativity, they are, generally speaking, not stupid. At the very least, they know if you don't tell students to submit their work, you can often count on them doing as little as possible.

godelski 3y ago
> If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with the source code. Wait, is your argument honestly "it's not cheating because they just trusted the students"? There's a huge difference between demoing something as "this is what we did" vs "we didn't quite get there, but this is what we're envisioning." Edit: You all are responding very weirdly. The cheating is because you're presenting "something" that is not that thing. Put a dog in a dress and call it a pretty woman and I'll call you a conman.
- lizard 3y ago
  No, the argument is, "It's not cheating because it wasn't a programming assignment."
- joshspankit 3y ago
  No, it’s not cheating because the ask was “something” not “some program”
  - addicted 3y ago

Uptrenda 3y ago

I'd call it cheating too but yeah. I like the pi and sensors though. Sounds like the start of something cool. Wish I could get a product like this to put in my roof to detect leaks. That would be useful.

elwell 3y ago

Of course it's cheating

Kuraj 3y ago

Kind of? Yes but they still demonstrated as much as was expected from them, which was very little to begin with.

whatever1 3y ago

BS. The CEO of one of the largest public companies just did it and he is fine. Board and shareholders all happy.

theGnuMe 3y ago
I gleefully await Matt Levine’s article on AI demos as securities fraud.
meiraleal 3y ago
Well done, you're halfway to secure a job at Google, no eh ethics/morals needed.

frail_figure 3y ago

The view up on that high horse must be interesting! Were you the kid who reminded teachers about homework? Literally all that matters is that they passed.

gardenhedge 3y ago
> Were you the kid who reminded teachers about homework? Are you trying to bully me or something? Not going to work with me. You've revealed your poor character with that comment.

icedchai 3y ago

If the teacher was competent, they would've asked to see the code.

Moomoomoo309 3y ago

It depends on what the intention of the assignment was. If it was primarily to help the students understand what these devices _could_ be used for, then it's fine. If it was to have them actually do it, well, then the professor should have at least tried to verify that. Given that it's for first-years who have no experience programming, it really could be either.

JohnFen 3y ago

It's very obviously cheating. They didn't do what the assignment asked.