3 ms·

This kind of thing is going to be the split between the technically inclined and the non-technically inclined. Those that believe thinking and understanding is

This kind of thing is going to be the split between the technically inclined and the non-technically inclined. Those that believe thinking and understanding is too hard or that school is not cool or whatever will have technology to slide by on. They will be apart of the non-technical society and they will languish there. Comfortable in their lower pay and social media and grocery store tomatoes. Truly one of the herd of corporate loyalty. Fine, I say, we can’t elevate everyone. It’s just a bit amusing though that for a long time the youth was smarter than the previous generation due to embrace of tech. Now the youth is going to be more and more clever and not necessarily more intelligent instead because that is what is valued, taking a shortcut that technology enables. Oddly it might end up being a rift between the lower class and the middle class. Or perhaps more of a reshuffling as those who are willing to put in the efforts to understand will be apart of the techno-literate class and those who “dont care” will be apart of the “dont care” class. Digital welfare for the non-nerdy.

windexh8er 2y ago
My concern is the assessment divide. In the district I live I happen to be on a parent board that's providing input to the leadership with respect to technology. Privacy and security are a huge component of LLMs currently, but beyond that I think the biggest area of interest is the assessment divide. Currently the district is looking at it through the lens of having students still "test" in traditional ways so that if, and when, assessment doesn't align with daily work they can start to understand where this divide exists. I really like the Ted Chiang quote from the article: "Using ChatGPT to complete assignments is like bringing a forklift into the weight room; you will never improve your cognitive fitness that way". I can already see this divide in some of the surrounding friend-circle wherein a lot of young (under the age of 12) are leveraging LLMs very heavily to direct them. I fear that these kids will lose the confidence, at a very early age, to even start something. It's widely discussed how getting started in projects is often the most cumbersome in a task timeline, and so without making things uncomfortable for this young generation to work at this skill I feel as though we're going to see the start of a significantly handicapped generation because they will over-rely on these tools. And, really, this is just one of many issues of over-reliance. > Now the youth is going to be more and more clever and not necessarily more intelligent instead because that is what is valued, taking a shortcut that technology enables. I 100% agree with this. A lot of students will fool their parents, and even a number of educators by leveraging this new "cleverness". But it's going to hit a dead end as soon as they're forced to do. I also think you're right in that this may become a class divide that further segments the population and also provides facilities for unfortunate control over the lower class through trained and targeted LLM responses.
- righthand 2y ago
  They will also be passed over by others who put in the work and can use logic, reasoning, arguments to defend or attack work. When the time comes to review work or output, what will the clever LLM kids say without an LLM? We’re basically asking people to stop being interested and stop having agency because a computer might have some incorrect but accessible summary of whatever topic. A solution might be to eliminate homework, since anything outside the classroom can be cleverly mounted. What happens when students can only work on their paper during class time? Or maybe handing out paper assignments again. They can cheat all they want but filling out the answers with a pen would go a little ways to instill the non-researched answer.

windexh8er 2y ago

My concern is the assessment divide. In the district I live I happen to be on a parent board that's providing input to the leadership with respect to technology. Privacy and security are a huge component of LLMs currently, but beyond that I think the biggest area of interest is the assessment divide. Currently the district is looking at it through the lens of having students still "test" in traditional ways so that if, and when, assessment doesn't align with daily work they can start to understand where this divide exists. I really like the Ted Chiang quote from the article: "Using ChatGPT to complete assignments is like bringing a forklift into the weight room; you will never improve your cognitive fitness that way". I can already see this divide in some of the surrounding friend-circle wherein a lot of young (under the age of 12) are leveraging LLMs very heavily to direct them. I fear that these kids will lose the confidence, at a very early age, to even start something. It's widely discussed how getting started in projects is often the most cumbersome in a task timeline, and so without making things uncomfortable for this young generation to work at this skill I feel as though we're going to see the start of a significantly handicapped generation because they will over-rely on these tools. And, really, this is just one of many issues of over-reliance. > Now the youth is going to be more and more clever and not necessarily more intelligent instead because that is what is valued, taking a shortcut that technology enables. I 100% agree with this. A lot of students will fool their parents, and even a number of educators by leveraging this new "cleverness". But it's going to hit a dead end as soon as they're forced to do. I also think you're right in that this may become a class divide that further segments the population and also provides facilities for unfortunate control over the lower class through trained and targeted LLM responses.

righthand 2y ago
They will also be passed over by others who put in the work and can use logic, reasoning, arguments to defend or attack work. When the time comes to review work or output, what will the clever LLM kids say without an LLM? We’re basically asking people to stop being interested and stop having agency because a computer might have some incorrect but accessible summary of whatever topic. A solution might be to eliminate homework, since anything outside the classroom can be cleverly mounted. What happens when students can only work on their paper during class time? Or maybe handing out paper assignments again. They can cheat all they want but filling out the answers with a pen would go a little ways to instill the non-researched answer.