3 ms·

Anecdotally, no one on my computer science course is doing the work. You could say AI is a learning tool generously, and it does help some people, but it seems

Anecdotally, no one on my computer science course is doing the work. You could say AI is a learning tool generously, and it does help some people, but it seems to have replaced a lot of their actual abilities to write stuff. Have you really learned something if they only way you can go about it is passing questions to ChatGPT? At that point the AI is doing the work and you are just a data entry person. I should add that this approach doesn't scale well. For instance, there are apps that let you take a picture of an equation and get a worked solution. In the short term, their ability to solve equations seems to have improved, but I don't think they'll learn as much doing it that way. I have been a part of several group project, and by this point almost all I've seen anyone else do is use ChatGPT. If we need to do some work and write a report on it, the work won't get done and Mr. GPT takes care of the report. I feel crazy for not using it. I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I remember hearing that their usage metrics drop by something like half over the summer holidays. The scale of this is so great. I think the worst part is that it's isolating. Perhaps before you would have asked a tutor or a lecturer or a friend to help you with something, but not its just GPT. There are lab sessions occasionally where a professor will show up and give guidance on the content, and I remember a good few sessions where it would be me and one other guy there out of 100+ people. I would guess everyone else just asks the machine.

jemmyw 2y ago
Just as an opposing anecdote, when I was doing CS at uni the group project, which was randomly allocated, was just as bad and this was 20 years ago. Only one other person in my group could coherently program and he was shit. So I did all the code. It was isolating in that situation too. Gpt might not be a factor, it's just the flavour of the moment. I was a bad student because I didn't need to try. Those few of my peers who did try and were good just blew it out the park because the competition was abysmal. This was a uni in the UK with a fairly well respected CS department at the time.
- addicted 2y ago
  Your anecdote actually makes the AI future look worse and your experience much better. Setting aside the absolute quality of work and learning, in your situation, the people who tried did a lot better. There were actual incentives to trying and learning because you were rewarded with better grades and then going forward likely a better job and better career and life. OTOH, the commenter you’re replying to, is suggesting the opposite. As someone who’s not using AI and are actually putting in the effort, they’re not being rewarded for it to the point they’re considering whether they’re the stupid ones for trying to learn in a learning institution. The incentives are completely backwards.
- James_K 2y ago
  Now imagine that those other people decide to contribute by "writing" the report that you're going to get graded on, with no understanding of code and not doing it themselves. Imagine that some people who are semi-competent at programming decide to contribute likewise. It takes them from do-nothing layabouts to active hindrances. Much worse than someone not knowing anything is someone pretending to know something, and I thank my lucky stars that none of them tried to write the code with AI. > This was a uni in the UK with a fairly well respected CS department at the time. I feel this sentence.
gaiagraphia 2y ago
So-called "professors" are just slow to adapt. University is a huge waste of money currently. ChatGPT is a blessing.

jemmyw 2y ago

Just as an opposing anecdote, when I was doing CS at uni the group project, which was randomly allocated, was just as bad and this was 20 years ago. Only one other person in my group could coherently program and he was shit. So I did all the code. It was isolating in that situation too. Gpt might not be a factor, it's just the flavour of the moment. I was a bad student because I didn't need to try. Those few of my peers who did try and were good just blew it out the park because the competition was abysmal. This was a uni in the UK with a fairly well respected CS department at the time.

addicted 2y ago
Your anecdote actually makes the AI future look worse and your experience much better. Setting aside the absolute quality of work and learning, in your situation, the people who tried did a lot better. There were actual incentives to trying and learning because you were rewarded with better grades and then going forward likely a better job and better career and life. OTOH, the commenter you’re replying to, is suggesting the opposite. As someone who’s not using AI and are actually putting in the effort, they’re not being rewarded for it to the point they’re considering whether they’re the stupid ones for trying to learn in a learning institution. The incentives are completely backwards.
James_K 2y ago
Now imagine that those other people decide to contribute by "writing" the report that you're going to get graded on, with no understanding of code and not doing it themselves. Imagine that some people who are semi-competent at programming decide to contribute likewise. It takes them from do-nothing layabouts to active hindrances. Much worse than someone not knowing anything is someone pretending to know something, and I thank my lucky stars that none of them tried to write the code with AI. > This was a uni in the UK with a fairly well respected CS department at the time. I feel this sentence.

gaiagraphia 2y ago

So-called "professors" are just slow to adapt. University is a huge waste of money currently. ChatGPT is a blessing.