3 ms·

I don't think ascribing cheating to this is the correct term. It's a bit akin to how calculators were cheating but yet in the real world everybody is fine (and

I don't think ascribing cheating to this is the correct term. It's a bit akin to how calculators were cheating but yet in the real world everybody is fine (and probably expects) you to do math using a calculator. I don't think Kroger would be happy if the clerks starts adding up your shopping cart by pen and paper. Would people call VFX cheaters since they aren't hand drawing each frame? Using a tool (AI) to do a job (Websites?) is fine. The problem of course is that the students are only learning that specific tool so the second a problem occurs that isn't easily solved with that tool they're a fish out of water. This is a weakness of the boot camp not the student per-say; although obviously somebody that can use ChatGPT + < any other skill > will be a more productive employee than somebody that can _just_ use ChatGPT. If your boot camp could be done solely using the plus button of a calculator; people would think it's not worth it. Now if your boot camp can be solved by ChatGPT is it really worth it?

kjkjadksj 3y ago
They are there to learn the topic at hand, not to delegate it to someone else whether that be chatgpt or a tutor they pay to take the uni exam for them with their student id. If a job is fine with hiring a delegator thats great for both parties but some jobs need domain experts too who can sniff bullshit from the ai output even if they do use it day to day.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jmuguy 3y ago
That's an over simplification. If students are using chatgpt to generate code that they themselves don't understand, and then submitting that whole cloth as their work, they're cheating - full stop. They're not using chatgpt as a tool in this case, any more than searching stack overflow and copying answers without understanding them is a tool. The calculator comparison is interesting - calculators can't be wrong. And if they can be, we're kind of screwed. Like NASA screwed when someone mixed up imperial and metric measurements. ChatGPT can and will be wrong because it doesn't actually know what its giving back to you. Until its code can be 100% correct, which I don't think is possible, it cannot be used as a simple tool that any one can use to generate code without actually knowing how the code it generates works. So yes - ultimately these students are cheating. Maybe it feels to them like they've just found a shortcut to being a developer, they haven't.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > calculators can't be wrong. Sure they can. There are numerous discussions around the net about this fact, but here is a reasonable high-level overview. https://www.thetechedvocate.org/can-a-calculator-be-wrong/ https://www.thetechedvocate.org/can-a-calculator-be-wrong/
  - jmuguy 3y ago
    They can't be wrong in the way that LLMs can be, which is the exact reason that using them for this comparison falls apart - but yes if we're splitting hairs they can be wrong in the same way that javascript is wrong when you ask it to add two floats together.
- illiac786 3y ago
  Let’s not forget calculators are doing math, the one thing which is binary right/wrong. Generative AI is doing much more. But I agree that copy-pasting ChatGPT output without remotely understanding it is cheating. Yes ChatGPT can do the exercise, but the output produced in the exercise is not the point, the point is assimilating knowledge which helps you move on to tasks AI cannot do. In this regard these students are cheating themselves (and the ones who tried not to cheat).
headcanon 3y ago
To use the calculator analogy, I think the concern is that the calculators sometimes return close but incorrect values, and now everyone learning arithmetic is just using the calculators instead of doing it by hand, and accepting those incorrect results as truth. The other side of this is that calculators are a much more powerful tool for someone who is already skilled in math, and those skills are best learned by actually doing problems by hand and thinking through them. So even if these tools end up being the de facto way to solve problems, we're still much better off training ourselves how to do things the hard way, and we do ourselves a disservice by skipping that step altogether. Which is a similar disservice we do ourselves by cheating in school. The difference is that someone who is dependent on the tool can get away with hiding their lack of skills for longer, and those lack of skills only show up in subtle but possibly critical ways.
tivert 3y ago
> If your boot camp could be done solely using the plus button of a calculator; people would think it's not worth it. What if it's a math boot-camp meant to increase your arithmetic proficiency? When I was in elementary school, I fully believed that calculators made memorizing arithmetic facts obsolete, so I didn't do it and just muddled through. I did the same for algebra (relying on my calculator's solver as soon as I could get away with it). That's hobbled me for the rest of my life, because I'm so calculator dependent that I'm was always too distracted by operating it to fully engage with more advanced math material. I can't think about math in my head because I get stuck on arithmetic problems. > Now if your boot camp can be solved by ChatGPT is it really worth it? Yes, for the reasons I outlined above. It's not about getting the answer, it's about getting the toolbox that will get you that answer and understand it. Do you want to be a Calculator Operator, Second Class or an Engineer?

kjkjadksj 3y ago

They are there to learn the topic at hand, not to delegate it to someone else whether that be chatgpt or a tutor they pay to take the uni exam for them with their student id. If a job is fine with hiring a delegator thats great for both parties but some jobs need domain experts too who can sniff bullshit from the ai output even if they do use it day to day.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jmuguy 3y ago

That's an over simplification. If students are using chatgpt to generate code that they themselves don't understand, and then submitting that whole cloth as their work, they're cheating - full stop. They're not using chatgpt as a tool in this case, any more than searching stack overflow and copying answers without understanding them is a tool. The calculator comparison is interesting - calculators can't be wrong. And if they can be, we're kind of screwed. Like NASA screwed when someone mixed up imperial and metric measurements. ChatGPT can and will be wrong because it doesn't actually know what its giving back to you. Until its code can be 100% correct, which I don't think is possible, it cannot be used as a simple tool that any one can use to generate code without actually knowing how the code it generates works. So yes - ultimately these students are cheating. Maybe it feels to them like they've just found a shortcut to being a developer, they haven't.

JohnFen 3y ago
> calculators can't be wrong. Sure they can. There are numerous discussions around the net about this fact, but here is a reasonable high-level overview. https://www.thetechedvocate.org/can-a-calculator-be-wrong/ https://www.thetechedvocate.org/can-a-calculator-be-wrong/
- jmuguy 3y ago
  They can't be wrong in the way that LLMs can be, which is the exact reason that using them for this comparison falls apart - but yes if we're splitting hairs they can be wrong in the same way that javascript is wrong when you ask it to add two floats together.
illiac786 3y ago
Let’s not forget calculators are doing math, the one thing which is binary right/wrong. Generative AI is doing much more. But I agree that copy-pasting ChatGPT output without remotely understanding it is cheating. Yes ChatGPT can do the exercise, but the output produced in the exercise is not the point, the point is assimilating knowledge which helps you move on to tasks AI cannot do. In this regard these students are cheating themselves (and the ones who tried not to cheat).

headcanon 3y ago

To use the calculator analogy, I think the concern is that the calculators sometimes return close but incorrect values, and now everyone learning arithmetic is just using the calculators instead of doing it by hand, and accepting those incorrect results as truth. The other side of this is that calculators are a much more powerful tool for someone who is already skilled in math, and those skills are best learned by actually doing problems by hand and thinking through them. So even if these tools end up being the de facto way to solve problems, we're still much better off training ourselves how to do things the hard way, and we do ourselves a disservice by skipping that step altogether. Which is a similar disservice we do ourselves by cheating in school. The difference is that someone who is dependent on the tool can get away with hiding their lack of skills for longer, and those lack of skills only show up in subtle but possibly critical ways.

tivert 3y ago

> If your boot camp could be done solely using the plus button of a calculator; people would think it's not worth it. What if it's a math boot-camp meant to increase your arithmetic proficiency? When I was in elementary school, I fully believed that calculators made memorizing arithmetic facts obsolete, so I didn't do it and just muddled through. I did the same for algebra (relying on my calculator's solver as soon as I could get away with it). That's hobbled me for the rest of my life, because I'm so calculator dependent that I'm was always too distracted by operating it to fully engage with more advanced math material. I can't think about math in my head because I get stuck on arithmetic problems. > Now if your boot camp can be solved by ChatGPT is it really worth it? Yes, for the reasons I outlined above. It's not about getting the answer, it's about getting the toolbox that will get you that answer and understand it. Do you want to be a Calculator Operator, Second Class or an Engineer?