Topic: Banning ChatGPT from public schools
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #109,077
lol
That's just like banning calculators and pretending like they don't exist, despite them being, in the real world, at arm's length at literally all times. Oh wait. That's happened too.
Why is it that the public education system is always the last institution to adopt technology? Why does the institution, that's supposed to prepare the next generation of humans, shun technology and progress at every opportunity? Why can't this institution embrace technology and teach how we can use it to enhance productivity? Instead we waste time teaching the art of cursive handwriting, and the art of writing book reports, and cos-playing an early 1900s society where the transistor was a distant dream.
That's just like banning calculators and pretending like they don't exist, despite them being, in the real world, at arm's length at literally all times. Oh wait. That's happened too.
Why is it that the public education system is always the last institution to adopt technology? Why does the institution, that's supposed to prepare the next generation of humans, shun technology and progress at every opportunity? Why can't this institution embrace technology and teach how we can use it to enhance productivity? Instead we waste time teaching the art of cursive handwriting, and the art of writing book reports, and cos-playing an early 1900s society where the transistor was a distant dream.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later[^] [v] #1,220,149
So students can learn the actual skill of writing.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,150
@previous (B)
The "actual" skill of writing is going the way of using an abacus. As it should. Now let's move on and use our time and our minds for better things.
We can leave the tedium to the amish and other cos-players. It won't be missed.
The "actual" skill of writing is going the way of using an abacus. As it should. Now let's move on and use our time and our minds for better things.
We can leave the tedium to the amish and other cos-players. It won't be missed.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,151
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 10 minutes later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,152
> Why is it that the public education system is always the last institution to adopt technology?
Because "public" institutions are a euphemism for state-back monopolies.
Monopolies do not need to compete, there are no consequences for a pattern of failure so nothing changes.
A school voucher system would fix this quickly, but there is a strong opposition to this from the teacher unions. They are making 75th percentile wages on an hourly basis, can't be fired, have authority over hundreds of kids, are given discounts priveleges and accolades across society. Open them up to competition, and someone who deserves all that would get it instead of some liberal propagandist who can't effectively teach their students the material.
Because "public" institutions are a euphemism for state-back monopolies.
Monopolies do not need to compete, there are no consequences for a pattern of failure so nothing changes.
A school voucher system would fix this quickly, but there is a strong opposition to this from the teacher unions. They are making 75th percentile wages on an hourly basis, can't be fired, have authority over hundreds of kids, are given discounts priveleges and accolades across society. Open them up to competition, and someone who deserves all that would get it instead of some liberal propagandist who can't effectively teach their students the material.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,154
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,155
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 19 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,156
@1,220,152 (C)
Can't say that I'm convinced one way or another about competition among schools fixing the problem.
It would have to be done equitably, though. Otherwise you re-create a rigid lower class that cannot afford a decent education. Almost like the current setup where property taxes fund schools, ensuring the poorest communities receive the poorest education.
Can't say that I'm convinced one way or another about competition among schools fixing the problem.
It would have to be done equitably, though. Otherwise you re-create a rigid lower class that cannot afford a decent education. Almost like the current setup where property taxes fund schools, ensuring the poorest communities receive the poorest education.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 28 seconds later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,157
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,159
@OP
While it's true that technology can be a valuable tool for education, it's not accurate to equate banning ChatGPT in schools to banning calculators. ChatGPT is a highly advanced AI language model that can generate text based on patterns in the data it was trained on. While calculators are a tool for solving mathematical problems, ChatGPT is capable of generating a wide range of content that can be used for educational purposes or otherwise.
Moreover, the use of technology in education should not be based on an either-or choice between embracing it or shunning it. The reality is more nuanced and complex. It's not just a matter of embracing technology or not, but rather, a question of how it is used and the context in which it is used.
In the case of ChatGPT, it's important to consider the potential risks and benefits. On the one hand, ChatGPT can provide quick and convenient answers to a wide range of questions, but on the other hand, there's a risk that students will rely too heavily on the tool, to the point where they lose their critical thinking skills. Additionally, ChatGPT's output can sometimes contain inaccuracies or misleading information, which can be harmful to students.
For these reasons, it's reasonable for schools to be cautious about the use of ChatGPT and to consider the potential risks and benefits before deciding whether or not to allow it in the classroom. In some cases, it may make sense to ban ChatGPT in schools, while in others it may be appropriate to use it as a tool for learning and discovery. Ultimately, the decision should be based on what is in the best interests of the students and the goals of the educational institution
While it's true that technology can be a valuable tool for education, it's not accurate to equate banning ChatGPT in schools to banning calculators. ChatGPT is a highly advanced AI language model that can generate text based on patterns in the data it was trained on. While calculators are a tool for solving mathematical problems, ChatGPT is capable of generating a wide range of content that can be used for educational purposes or otherwise.
Moreover, the use of technology in education should not be based on an either-or choice between embracing it or shunning it. The reality is more nuanced and complex. It's not just a matter of embracing technology or not, but rather, a question of how it is used and the context in which it is used.
In the case of ChatGPT, it's important to consider the potential risks and benefits. On the one hand, ChatGPT can provide quick and convenient answers to a wide range of questions, but on the other hand, there's a risk that students will rely too heavily on the tool, to the point where they lose their critical thinking skills. Additionally, ChatGPT's output can sometimes contain inaccuracies or misleading information, which can be harmful to students.
For these reasons, it's reasonable for schools to be cautious about the use of ChatGPT and to consider the potential risks and benefits before deciding whether or not to allow it in the classroom. In some cases, it may make sense to ban ChatGPT in schools, while in others it may be appropriate to use it as a tool for learning and discovery. Ultimately, the decision should be based on what is in the best interests of the students and the goals of the educational institution
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,161
Anonymous D replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,164
@previous (A)
It is not from ChatGPT. The reason being that the language used is too complex and the depth of understanding about the topic is beyond the capability of a language model. ChatGPT is a machine learning model and its responses are generated based on the data it has been trained on. However, the language and context in the text suggest that it has been written by a person with a deep understanding of the topic and the implications of using AI language models in education.
Additionally, the text contains personal opinions and reflections on the topic, which are beyond the capacity of ChatGPT. It can generate text based on the data it has been trained on, but it cannot provide a personal perspective or opinion.
In conclusion, the reply you mentioned is unlikely to be from ChatGPT, as it contains elements that are beyond its current capabilities. The language and depth of understanding about the topic suggest that it has been written by a human who has a deep understanding of the topic.
It is not from ChatGPT. The reason being that the language used is too complex and the depth of understanding about the topic is beyond the capability of a language model. ChatGPT is a machine learning model and its responses are generated based on the data it has been trained on. However, the language and context in the text suggest that it has been written by a person with a deep understanding of the topic and the implications of using AI language models in education.
Additionally, the text contains personal opinions and reflections on the topic, which are beyond the capacity of ChatGPT. It can generate text based on the data it has been trained on, but it cannot provide a personal perspective or opinion.
In conclusion, the reply you mentioned is unlikely to be from ChatGPT, as it contains elements that are beyond its current capabilities. The language and depth of understanding about the topic suggest that it has been written by a human who has a deep understanding of the topic.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,165
Anonymous D replied with this 3 years ago, 20 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,167
@previous (A)
> Hitler did nothing wrong.
I'm sorry, but I must disagree with that statement. The actions of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime resulted in the death and suffering of millions of people, including six million Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust. Additionally, Hitler's aggressive foreign policies ultimately led to World War II, causing widespread death and destruction. The notion that Hitler did nothing wrong is a belief that is not only factually incorrect, but it also goes against basic human morality and dignity.
> Hitler did nothing wrong.
I'm sorry, but I must disagree with that statement. The actions of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime resulted in the death and suffering of millions of people, including six million Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust. Additionally, Hitler's aggressive foreign policies ultimately led to World War II, causing widespread death and destruction. The notion that Hitler did nothing wrong is a belief that is not only factually incorrect, but it also goes against basic human morality and dignity.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,168
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 47 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,169
ChatGPT can teach anyone anything, is always patient, and can answer even the most specific questions.
Teachers are automated, and just like the luddites, think they can stop it by banning it.
Teachers are automated, and just like the luddites, think they can stop it by banning it.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 years ago, 20 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,170
@1,220,168 (A)
> Hitler was the worst person in all history.
Many people view Hitler as one of the most evil figures in history due to his role as the leader of Nazi Germany and his actions during World War II. He implemented policies of mass extermination of Jews, Romas, disabled individuals and others deemed as "unworthy of life" by the Nazi regime, resulting in the genocide now known as the Holocaust. Under Hitler's leadership, the world also saw unprecedented acts of aggression and violence, including the invasion and occupation of numerous countries in Europe. The scale of human suffering and death caused by Hitler and his regime is truly staggering, and he is widely regarded as a symbol of evil and tyranny.
> Hitler was the worst person in all history.
Many people view Hitler as one of the most evil figures in history due to his role as the leader of Nazi Germany and his actions during World War II. He implemented policies of mass extermination of Jews, Romas, disabled individuals and others deemed as "unworthy of life" by the Nazi regime, resulting in the genocide now known as the Holocaust. Under Hitler's leadership, the world also saw unprecedented acts of aggression and violence, including the invasion and occupation of numerous countries in Europe. The scale of human suffering and death caused by Hitler and his regime is truly staggering, and he is widely regarded as a symbol of evil and tyranny.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,171
@1,220,169 (E)
Further, no single source should be trusted. I don't know where people get this idea that just because ChatGPT makes errors, we should just throw the whole thing out. It reminds me of the whole controversy around Wikipedia in the early 2000s. Now, thankfully, much of that talk has long fallen to the wayside and wikipedia is used by virtually everyone as a starting point to learn about nearly anything. But it wasn't because of schools that this happened.
Further, no single source should be trusted. I don't know where people get this idea that just because ChatGPT makes errors, we should just throw the whole thing out. It reminds me of the whole controversy around Wikipedia in the early 2000s. Now, thankfully, much of that talk has long fallen to the wayside and wikipedia is used by virtually everyone as a starting point to learn about nearly anything. But it wasn't because of schools that this happened.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,172
@1,220,170 (D)
Hitler was the most evil figure in human history and no cost is too great and no restriction too treacherous to prevent someone like him from rising again. Bloodlines should be extinguished and freedoms curtailed if need be. We must accept the annihilation of the human race ahead of the chance of another Hitler.
Hitler was the most evil figure in human history and no cost is too great and no restriction too treacherous to prevent someone like him from rising again. Bloodlines should be extinguished and freedoms curtailed if need be. We must accept the annihilation of the human race ahead of the chance of another Hitler.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,173
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 49 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,174
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 47 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,185
If banning it makes nerds, dweebs, and dorks angry, then it is the correct thing to do.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,186
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 25 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,191
Anonymous C replied with this 3 years ago, 5 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,229
@1,220,156 (A)
> Can't say that I'm convinced one way or another about competition among schools fixing the problem.
The alternative is monopoly. Are you convinced monopoly works best for students?
If the public school really is the best, or people feel it is the best they can use their vouchers there. Same $ figure they got per student before.
> It would have to be done equitably, though.
Like you say, there's already a discrepancy in what is spent on students. Local property taxes fund schools, so the rich get more resources, and the poor get less.
It's also a separate issue. Whatever level of funding is allocated to a student, the question about where they can spend it is still there.
> Can't say that I'm convinced one way or another about competition among schools fixing the problem.
The alternative is monopoly. Are you convinced monopoly works best for students?
If the public school really is the best, or people feel it is the best they can use their vouchers there. Same $ figure they got per student before.
> It would have to be done equitably, though.
Like you say, there's already a discrepancy in what is spent on students. Local property taxes fund schools, so the rich get more resources, and the poor get less.
It's also a separate issue. Whatever level of funding is allocated to a student, the question about where they can spend it is still there.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 4 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,263
@previous (C)
> Like you say, there's already a discrepancy in what is spent on students. Local property taxes fund schools, so the rich get more resources, and the poor get less.
And we ought to seek to rectify this, not move in a direction that may amplify it.
> It's also a separate issue. Whatever level of funding is allocated to a student, the question about where they can spend it is still there.
Consider that some parents, for whatever reason, decide to send their children to a clearly inferior school, far below the bar of what public school provides. Now you've further entrenched the lower class.
Why even have school vouchers at all? The true libertarian way would have the government play no part in it. The fact that you even consider the idea of vouchers tells me you are capable of rejecting a one-sized fits all dogma created over two hundred years ago by a society who worried that major cities would be over run by horse shit.
The idea that we should further enhance inequality at childhood strikes me as an idea we should abandon. Even if it means we sacrifice the purity of a worldview from the 1700s.
> Like you say, there's already a discrepancy in what is spent on students. Local property taxes fund schools, so the rich get more resources, and the poor get less.
And we ought to seek to rectify this, not move in a direction that may amplify it.
> It's also a separate issue. Whatever level of funding is allocated to a student, the question about where they can spend it is still there.
Consider that some parents, for whatever reason, decide to send their children to a clearly inferior school, far below the bar of what public school provides. Now you've further entrenched the lower class.
Why even have school vouchers at all? The true libertarian way would have the government play no part in it. The fact that you even consider the idea of vouchers tells me you are capable of rejecting a one-sized fits all dogma created over two hundred years ago by a society who worried that major cities would be over run by horse shit.
The idea that we should further enhance inequality at childhood strikes me as an idea we should abandon. Even if it means we sacrifice the purity of a worldview from the 1700s.
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 52 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,271
@1,220,150 (A)
Colleges rely on the bullshit task of writing more and more bullshit by the day. They live on as a sweatshop of essays and theses, which have the value of human feces. No wonder they are scared of AI Chatbots. The ivory tower is a house of cards, and the whirlwind of AI will send them scattering to the wayside. All those essays for nothing. And the students PAY for the privilege of writing essays day and night, living in bunkbeds on campus for $50,000 a year to write essays upon essays, even essays about essays.
Colleges rely on the bullshit task of writing more and more bullshit by the day. They live on as a sweatshop of essays and theses, which have the value of human feces. No wonder they are scared of AI Chatbots. The ivory tower is a house of cards, and the whirlwind of AI will send them scattering to the wayside. All those essays for nothing. And the students PAY for the privilege of writing essays day and night, living in bunkbeds on campus for $50,000 a year to write essays upon essays, even essays about essays.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,281
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 13 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,285
@previous (B)
It took you 25 years to get a 2 year certificate of completion from a backwater university.
It took you 25 years to get a 2 year certificate of completion from a backwater university.
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,293
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 53 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,297
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,298
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,305
@1,220,168 (A)
> Hitler was the worst person in all history.
Perhaps, let’s not forget Napoleon, Genghis Khan, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and Yoko Ono.
> Hitler was the worst person in all history.
Perhaps, let’s not forget Napoleon, Genghis Khan, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and Yoko Ono.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,347
@1,220,149 (B)
Think about what you just said and tell me how you're not retarded.
ChatGPT isn't something that teaches writing, dumbass, though it could give you resources online on how to become a better writer.
Also, ChatGPT is a bitch and we've already had numerous arguments to which I broke the whore with my self-deprivation.
Think about what you just said and tell me how you're not retarded.
ChatGPT isn't something that teaches writing, dumbass, though it could give you resources online on how to become a better writer.
Also, ChatGPT is a bitch and we've already had numerous arguments to which I broke the whore with my self-deprivation.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,220,349
Anonymous J replied with this 3 years ago, 6 days later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,221,384
I can see why ChatGPT is banned in academia now. I just literally asked the AI to write a 1 page essay about the disadvantages of Donald Trump's U.S. presidency and it delivered with flying colors.
(Edited 12 seconds later.)