Ai detectors suck

[u/Prs8863765]

Me and my Tutor worked on the whole essay and my teacher also helped me with it. I never even used AI. All of my friends and this class all used AI and guess what I’m the only one who got a zero. I just put my essay into multiple detectors and four out of five say 90% + human and the other one says 90% AI.

[u/Brnny202]

This should be higher. You said you had a tutor. Did you email or text them? You have evidence. Fight.

[u/everysaturday → u/Brnny202]

I'll bet a testicle this ends up going two ways in the near future.

1. A family with sue a school, and rightly so, for falsely accusing a kid of plagiarism and the ruling with be with the family setting a precedent.

2. Some poor kid is going to commit suicide because they've been acused of something they didn't do.

On point two, i'm not an angry person, the complete opposite but I swear to whatever deity there is out that if it my kid was accused of doing something they didn't do, it's my red line and i'll be the first person to mortgage everything I own to sue the shit out of the school that made the accusation.

What a horse shit part of existence where the people teaching our kids use AI to detect AI and complain our kids use AI.

[u/Awkward_Wolverine → u/everysaturday]

This is the equivalent "you won't have a calculator with you when you get older" Gonna be an interesting future

[u/on_off_on_again → u/Awkward_Wolverine]

Well, that IS how it should be treated. Elementary aged students have no business using calculators. They should master the basics. Once they move on to more advanced math where basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division is just busy work in solving more advanced equations? Then sure, makes sense to use calculators.

Similarly, elementary school students have no business using Grammarly. They need to master the basics when all they do is write single sentences or single paragraphs. Once they have assignments involving lengthy essays? Sure, have an editor.

ChatGPT? Idk, I imagine it's probably best to view it the same way. Once basics are mastered, students should be able to use it. Probably collegiate level only. MAYBE high school seniors.

[u/IfImhappyyourehappy → u/on_off_on_again]

Intelligence isn't hindered through the use of tools. It's how society handles the tool. Chatgpt is a much better teacher than my teacher is 

[u/Apprehensive-Let3348 → u/IfImhappyyourehappy]

True, but if you don't understand how the tool functions, then you will never achieve any level of mastery.

[u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey → u/Apprehensive-Let3348]

I teach high school math and I have my students do matrices by hand before they ever touch a calculator. They gain an understanding of the process that gives them greater insight into what is actually happening and when it is a valuable tool to use vs. some other process.

People seem to lose track of the idea that high school is really about learning how to learn, problem-solving, and developing critical thinking, not necessarily about the utility of that particular subject or material.

[u/ThatAlarmingHamster → u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey]

Thank you.

My high school Calc teacher taught us how to use a calculator. When I got to college, my understanding of calculus was so poor that the engineering department questioned my entire math education. I wasn't the only one, so they made us take a 3-quarter refresher starting back with basic math. We literally spent a day or two on basic multiplication and division "just to be sure".

[u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey → u/ThatAlarmingHamster]

This is more common than you may know. College English departments have freshman that can't even complete a compare and contrast assignment. Reading assignments longer than a page, much less a book (gasp) are difficult. Many colleges have the same math challenges you describe.

[u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey → u/IfImhappyyourehappy]

The problem with chatgpt and other large language model ai's is they are not capable of original thought. Ask it a rote memorization type of question, where it has access to that data and it will give you a rote response. Ask it to infer something, predict something, or even just count? It's in the weeds at that point.

I'm not against using tools after a certain level of mastery has been accumulated by the learner, but ai is not ready for that yet and students can do themselves a great disservice by using it as a substitute for their own writing and critical thinking.

[u/iftlatlw → u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey]

Your knowledge of genai is limited.

[u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey → u/iftlatlw]

Most genai is used to enhance the conversational aspect of your interactions. It basically helps the ai seem more human-like. It does not help with academic papers as it is unable to create truly original thought or have any critical thinking abilities..... yet.

And, even if it did, especially if it did have those abilities, we should still require our students to acquire those skills before using any ai tools.

[u/bunchedupwalrus → u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey]

Interesting you mention academic papers. Stanford recently published a preprint on the topic

Can LLMs Generate Novel Research Ideas?” by Chenglei Si, Diyi Yang, and Tatsunori Hashimoto

By recruiting over 100 NLP researchers to write novel ideas and blind reviews of both LLM and human ideas, we obtain the first statistically significant conclusion on current LLM capabilities for research ideation: we find LLM-generated ideas are judged as more novel (p < 0.05) than human expert ideas while being judged slightly weaker on feasibility

https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.04109

I really gotta ask how extensively you’ve used the higher end models

[u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey → u/bunchedupwalrus]

I gotta ask if you even read the entire abstract of the study you linked - here's what you left out:

Despite this, no evaluations have shown that LLM systems can take the very first step of producing novel, expert-level ideas

we identify open problems in building and evaluating research agents, including failures of LLM self-evaluation and their lack of diversity in generation.

Getting back to the point, ai is not a tool k-12 students should be allowed to use as it supplants their ability to think critically, originally, and analytically.

[u/bunchedupwalrus → u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey]

Is that what your argument was? I don’t think it was, and I don’t enjoy having fence posts shifted on me. If you want to discuss whether it is capable of generating expert level ideas from scratch with no intervention, that’s a different discussion and we can have it once you finish the first one, if you finish the first one.

You said it doesn’t help with academic level papers. That it is unable to create original ideas. This research says otherwise. And it says it very clearly. For the record. I don’t share articles I’ve only read the abstract of. I share articles I’ve read. And you’ve picked out a few meaningful sentences from a very nuanced read, and are acting like it’s the whole point. Shit, GPT 3.5 was better at reading and summarizing a paper than your showing.

Should kids be allowed to use ai? Yeah, of course they should. They should learn how to work with it, utilize its strengths and understand its weaknesses, because it is here. It is a tool to be used correctly. Anything else just stokes more ignorance, and makes them more susceptible to using it incorrectly later in life, not to mention handicaps them in an ever more competitive world

[u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey → u/bunchedupwalrus]

Dear lord. I'm sorry I started this. Yes, my larger original point (regardless of the one sentence you are choosing to focus on) was that ai should not be used in k-12 settings. Probably not in college either. To be clear, my pedantic friend, what I mean is that students in any setting should not use ai to generate what should be their original work.

I'm done with you now. But feel free to reply all you like. I doubt you'll be able to stop yourself.

[u/bunchedupwalrus → u/AdhesiveSeaMonkey]

This reply really gave me some extreme ick. So for funzies, I tried asking ChatGPT to analyze your language, so I could remain impartial and better understand why you felt the need to reply at all.

Condescending Language: Referring to the other person as “my pedantic friend” is a clear indicator of condescension. The speaker is attempting to distract from the main point by insisting the discussion has overly fixated on trivial details despite a clear response to the stated position. This indicates some degree of intellectual arrogance and frustration

Dismissiveness and Attempt to End the Conversation: The comment “I’m done with you now” indicates a desire to terminate further dialogue. Yet they then say, “But feel free to reply all you like. I doubt you’ll be able to stop yourself,” which is a taunt. This contradiction suggests mixed feelings: they may primarily want to maintain a sense of control by predicting and disparaging the other person’s future responses in advance

Projection and Challenge: The final lines imply that the speaker believes the other person lacks self-control or the ability to refrain from arguing back. This is both a provocation and an attempt to remain in a position of superiority while calling for the discussions close.

Overall Impression: The personality cues point toward someone who feels intellectually cornered but wishes to remain self-assured. They exhibit frustration, condescension, a rigid adherence to traditionalist values, and a desire to believe they’ve maintained the moral and intellectual high ground

Neat. Looks like we were both right. Certainly too dangerous a tool to fall into student hands. Well anyway, since you’re done with me now, my liege, good luck

[u/Coronado92118 → u/IfImhappyyourehappy]

What questions does ChatGPT ask you to determine if you’ve comprehend the information it’s given you? Does it challenge your assumptions? Does it ask you to draw conclusions?

If you’re not making it challenge you to think asks expiration and check your answers, it’s not teaching you as much as you think!

[u/sortofhappyish → u/IfImhappyyourehappy]

No court is ever going to ask "show me on the doll where ChatGPT touched you"

[u/ApplePearCherry → u/on_off_on_again]

I agree that is how it should be. Learn before reliance.

However the line "you won't have a calculator on your pocket" has not aged well.

[u/SneferuHorizon → u/on_off_on_again]

Then lest go too the really basics, lets teach them how to write in stone or papyrus or clay. Because in the future it will be hard to have a piece of paper or something to write on.

[u/on_off_on_again → u/SneferuHorizon]

That's a terrible analogy. Teaching someone to write on paper isn't any different than writing on any other medium. I have never written on papyrus but I'm 100% sure I could figure it out... because that's a transferrable skill.

But I never even said they needed to write on paper. I don't see a problem with typing.

[u/Little-Plankton-3410 → u/on_off_on_again]

Disagree. I wrote a novel is 7th grade and I I could do complex calculus in my head (when I was younger anyway. not sure about now). All you accomplish by forcing me to not use tools is forcing me to pay attention to the less important repetitive calculation or task instead of the task the calculation is in service of. you increase my cognitive load by filling my brain with the less meaningful part of the problem.

sure, not everyone is me but i think this observation scales down. if your test or assignment is effective, someone who lacks understanding won't be able to use the tool to be successful. and if someone clever can reach understanding quickly using the tool enduring the course of the assignment or test (which i did a lot, going in blind to open book exams), well, maybe the coursework is a waste of their time.

[u/on_off_on_again → u/Little-Plankton-3410]

If you could do complex calculus in your head then you should be well aware that you need to understand basic math in order to do intermediate math in order to do advanced math.

If kids aren't able to wrap their head around addition, they won't be able to wrap their head around order of operations. If they don't understand order of operations, they won't be doing algebra or higher.

If you don't force kids to learn addition then they won't be able to do more advanced calculations. Which, irl, you don't normally need to do even basic calculations, let alone advanced ones.

BUT

You need to understand them conceptually, just to be able to manage finances.

[u/Little-Plankton-3410 → u/on_off_on_again]

agree to disagree. i never learned a damn thing from mass class. it was all pretty obvious up through fairly advanced differential equations. i programmed a calculator that was feature equivalent to a ti-92 (the calculator that could do a 3d graphing a solve caluculus through brute force, mostly). i am fairly sure i was helped zero percent by slavishly writing down steps that i could do in my head in half a second. i think other people appear to be helped by such nonsense only because you have trained them to focus on and be judged on the wrong thing.

i dont recall having to show my math on the sat which was actually important. only reason showing my work was important in my classes was because people like you decided it was important.

[u/sortofhappyish → u/on_off_on_again]

By this same logic, children shouldn't use ballpoint pens.

They need to learn how to use a quill and ink. Lessons on Goose plucking should be compulsory.

OR they should have to carve everything into stone tablets like the olde days.

[u/chestbumpsandbeer → u/sortofhappyish]

No, it’s more similar to saying kids don’t need to learn how to write by hand when you they can just use a device to transcribe their voice to text.

The fundamentals of knowledge are important.

[u/Mental_Ask45 → u/on_off_on_again]

The Simpsons S03E08 "Separate Vocations" "She (Lisa) secretly steals all of the Teachers' Editions of the schoolbooks from the other teachers and hides them in her locker. After closing it, Lisa walks away snickering in victory knowing the disaster that will unfold."