8 ms·

> The parents' case hangs largely on the student handbook's lack of a specific statement about AI, even though that same handbook bans unauthorized use of techn

• ChrisRR 2y ago
  It's such a stupid argument. That because the handbook didn't list the specific method of cheating it was therefore allowed. How about just don't cheat?
• jancsika 2y ago
  What's the relevance? Are you going to embark on a "Let's Educate The Users" mission for parenting?
  • add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
    It would be futile. Parents and children are now united in not wanting to be educated.
    • djaouen 2y ago
      SAD!
    • slowmovintarget 2y ago
      This has got to be specific to the US, yes? None of my overseas colleagues have this attitude toward education, and my wife (now an American, but an immigrant) certainly doesn't.
      • hn_version_0023 2y ago
        It seems to highly correlate with religious fundamentalism, IMO, which has a great many angry adherents worldwide, as well as in the US.
      • eastbound 2y ago
        [flagged]
        • result2vino 2y ago
          [flagged]
• thrw42A8N 2y ago
  What is unauthorized use of technology? Is the light I need to read not technology? Is using the internet to find more about a topic not technology? Where is the line that makes AI forbidden?
  • lincon127 2y ago
    Libertarian brain
  • llamaimperative 2y ago
    Don't think yourself into a hole there bud
  • theamk 2y ago
    Have you actually read the piece? The answers to those is in the written policy the student was given. But even without the policy, it should be pretty clear that passing others' work as your own (be they people or AI) is academic dishonesty. As judge said, "the emergence of generative AI may present some nuanced challenges for educators, the issue here is not particularly nuanced"
    • thrw42A8N 2y ago
      Is what I wrote here mine or not? I used the autocorrect suggestions almost exclusively, wrote few letters only.
      • kenjackson 2y ago
        Then, no. This isn’t text you generated. No one cares on Internet forums though.
      • theamk 2y ago
        Who came up with the words? If autocorrect is acting as a typist, transferring your words to screen, you are the author.
        • 2y ago
• david38 2y ago
  Agreed. Only someone trying to cheat would use the excuse that it wasn’t explicitly stated that AI was cheating. This reminds me of the court case where they asked the court to define child pornography and they said “I can can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.” Imagine saying with a straight face that some pictures you have of a minor are fine because this particular pose, facial expression, and clothing wasn’t specifically designed child porn. It would instantly make you sound like a pedo, like he sounds like a cheater
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • tanaros 2y ago
    > This reminds me of the court case where they asked the court to define child pornography and they said “I can can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.” If you’re referring to the famous statement from Justice Potter Stewart’s concurrence in Jacobellis v. Ohio, that comment was in reference to defining “hardcore pornography,” not child pornography.
    • shiroiushi 2y ago
      Exactly, it wasn't about CP (in particular) at all, just pornography. Which makes it a really horrible ruling: at least with CP, you can use age limits, though there's still huge controversies about 1) pictures by parents of their kids doing stuff like taking a bath and 2) artwork/animation that isn't even photography and never involved any actual children. Stewart's ruling was ridiculous: how is anyone supposed to know whether something is "pornographic" or not if it can just be determined by some judge arbitrarily and capriciously, and there's no objective standard whatsoever? They could just rule any picture of an unclothed person to be illegal, even if it's something medical in nature. Heck, they could even rule a medical diagram to be porn. Or anything they want, really.
      • rightbyte 2y ago
        > though there's still huge controversies about 1) pictures by parents of their kids doing stuff like taking a bath Is this a controversy in the US? I am fine with people worrying about Zuckerberg or Sandar potentially watching their naked kids, but I guess that the angle is that the parents would be 'perverts' and not the surveillance state being a problem?
• quantified 2y ago
  Highly successful people like Elon Musk and Donald Trump succeed in part because they push the rules really hard, and they win enough in the cases when it matters. So it's a proven strategy, though it doesn't always work.
  • griffzhowl 2y ago
    It's no good cherry-picking success stories to evaluate a strategy. You have to know how often it fails too. Anyway, "pushing the rules" is so vague, and it could be done intelligently, ethically, or otherwise. In this particular case the student copy-pasted AI output in an assignment and tried to pass it off as his own work. I mean, come on... the fact his went to court is just absurd
  • K0HAX 2y ago
    Criminals push the rules really hard too. It's just that they're only labeled criminals by society if they're caught, prosecuted, and punished. People who "push the rules" (I call this cheating, if I was playing a tabletop game with someone who did this, I would say they were cheating too) have an unfair advantage over the people who do follow the rules.
    • shiroiushi 2y ago
      It's like sociopaths: smart sociopaths become successful businesspeople and politicians, while stupid sociopaths end up in prison. People who are good at pushing the rules and have some kind of knack for knowing which rules to push and how far, end up succeeding over the rule-followers, while the people who lack this talent and push the wrong rules, or push too far, end up failing somehow (and maybe in prison).
• trod1234 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • nkrisc 2y ago
    That’s a lot of words that say nothing to defend high school plagiarism. If you turn in work that isn’t yours and represent it as yours, it is plagiarism, whether accidental or intentional.
    • trod1234 2y ago
      [flagged]
      • arp242 2y ago
        You can't call people delusional, or insinuate they might be schizophrenic. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        • trod1234 2y ago
          [flagged]
      • jazzyjackson 2y ago
        As long as we're casting diagnoses, do you suffer from bouts of mania or are you just on black market Adderall with nothing productive to do? You still need to sleep you know, I know with Adderall you can still feel good 24 hours in, but your reasoning abilities degrade. Anyway, yes, children should be disciplined in order to prevent them from plagiarizing a.k.a. putting their name on work that's not theirs, otherwise they grow up to be liars and con artists.
        • trod1234 2y ago
          > As long as we're casting diagnoses That's a snipe, which violates the rules. What I said doesn't support such a conclusion. > Anyway, yes children should be disciplined in order to prevent them from plagiarizing No one said otherwise, the point being made was it must be done fairly and equitably, without arbitrariness. If you discipline them arbitrarily you induce learned helplessness which few people ever recover from. To be fair, one needs to have that element of identity, the means and measure, must be properly defined and not circularly defined or indirectly referenced. Absent that, say your kid pissed off the teacher who holds a grudge the entire semester. Your kid does the hard work, but the teacher sets them up at the very end so they lose half a year of their life and damage their future outcomes. You must design systems so abuses like that don't occur because they will occur absent the structure preventing it. How do you suppose that kind of experience might contribute to them growing up? Would they become liars and con artists because only those people who can fool the teacher can pass?
• jjav 2y ago
  > I'm going out on a limb here, but if this is the viewpoint of the people who raised him, then I'm not surprised he cheated. At my child's elementary school and now middle school the teachers openly ecourage using AI chat for schoolwork, to help the kids understand the usefulness and the uselessness of it. I think that's great. AI isn't going away, so pretending students won't be using it at all times, both now and in their lives, is pretty naive and hopeless. Better to embrace it and teach them what it can and can't do. From the article: > the students had indiscriminately copied and pasted text from the AI application, including citations to nonexistent books (i.e., AI hallucinations). They should not be punished for using AI. They should, however, just get a very bad grade for "including citations to nonexistent books". Which would also be a good lesson in why AI is useful but you can't trust it at all without validation.
  • Suppafly 2y ago
    >They should not be punished for using AI. They should, however, just get a very bad grade for "including citations to nonexistent books". This. We should apply this sort of logic in most situations, penalize for the actual 'crime', worrying about the meaningless details outside of that is just a distraction that confuses the issue.
  • dartos 2y ago
    It was considered cheating to copy and paste my paper from Wikipedia. Why is it any different in this case?
  • tartoran 2y ago
    >AI isn't going away, so pretending students won't be using it at all times, both now and in their lives, is pretty naive and hopeless. Better to embrace it and teach them what it can and can't do. I agree with that but school should focus on fundamentals. The temptation and the ability of AI to do the school work for students so they don't need to put into any effort is a real problem; learning should require some effort and AI could solve that part for students. On the other hand AI could be used for some type of education, but then people tend to throw the baby with the bathwater and declare AI as the principal tool for learning, further diminishing the role of professors and mentors.