One generation from “don’t trust wikipedia” to “just ask chatGPT.”
They still say “don’t trust wikipedia,” btw.
At least WPedia has decent references onboard for backup. The only GPT I’ve seen offer (2) references is at DDG.
Don’t trust peer reviewed sourced material, trust this black box that gives you answers.
Getting its information from Wikipedia
The fact that this phrase is revolutionary and newsworthy makes this world so dystopian that it’s hard to believe.
I don’t get it.
Weren’t schools telling children to “comply”, just a few weeks ago?I still remember having marks deducted in junior school for answering that the light does not turn on instantly after switching the button on.
the American education system in a nutshell.
that’s why I tell my kids, learn as much as you can, try your best, but don’t get upset about a poor test grade here or there. You can learn anything you want, you just have to be willing to put in the effort.
the only useful thing I learned in the American education system is that you can’t rely on it to educate, as it’s designed to generate. Generate workers, voters, debt mules, pawns.
Now that I think about it, it might have used “instantaneous”, so my fault would have been just that I didn’t know the difference vs “instant” :P.
But then again, that would partially be the teacher’s fault for not pointing that out when I raised that question in class.
Many junior high teachers aren’t often the most knowledgable about science details. (How long it takes a light to turn on depends on how it’s made. But none of them become visible ‘instantly’. ) What (s)he (sh/c)ould have done is have you defend yourself with a reference. And then apologize.
That was the year when we were taught of the speed of light and the specific question might have been at the end of the same chapter in the text book.
Somehow I had a vague feeling that the effect of turning on the switch should not reach the light instantly.It was much later, that I found out how it was related to the absolute speed of information that is available in current theory.
Note, that I hadn’t used the internet as much back then and it was much later, that I started diving into Wikipedia.On the other hand, teachers are supposed to be university graduates themselves, so considering that I had the answer to that question by 12th, I would expect the teacher to at least be able to correctly answer that.
Even if the switch ‘instantly’ completed the circuit, electricity does not move along a wire at the ‘speed of light’, but only about 66% of that speed. If the light contains a filament, it has to heat up to several hundres of degrees before it’s visible. Fluorescent takes longer; even an LED does not shed light ‘instantly’. So he was wrong on multiple counts. BUT they don’t teach such details in college (except in physics classes). AFAIK,most junior high ‘science’ teachers are not all that familiar with such details.
iirc, basics of general relativity was taught in high school and the speed of information was explained by the teacher.
For some reason, the NCERT website seems to be down rn, so I can’t recheck.
A lot of adults have yet to learn this…
Why are so many people seemingly against this?
The health of the nation requires a citizenry capable of critical thinking to draw upon to manage and direct the fate of the nation. Now, obviously, the wealthy don’t want anyone but themselves to be capable of such a thing. So here we are.
You can go read on r/teachers (https://redlib.catsarch.com/r/Teachers) just how bad this shit is getting--both phone use, and AI use for assignments.
We seriously need to completely ban both phones and AI use in grade school. Back to pencil and paper, and “show your work”. The kids coming out of high school now can barely read, beyond texting. It’s frightening.
If you give a fuck about your kids, you’ll make sure they can read and write, because the schools don’t give a fuck about your kids.
Teachers give a fuck. Unfortunately we refuse to adequately fund schools and don’t give teachers the latitude to teach.
They sneaking in those dummy phones too?
One thing to promote literacy might be calm down about the sex, drugs and violence in books. I didn’t have a single interesting assigned reading until Red Dragon in highschool.
A Time to Kill, great. Wish I read that instead of to kill a mockingbird.
Bad take, Mockingbird is great. Compelling and depressingly relevant to this day.
It’s a good book, yes, but I was not interested in it and I had the executive function of a teenage boy.
If we catered education to only the things that appeal to the most distracted teenage boys it would just be tits and explosions.
Actually I’d like to argue the reflective point: why is there not an expectation that coursework should be interesting and compelling for students?
why is there not an expectation that coursework should be interesting and compelling for students?
As you said, you had the executive function of a teenage boy. The works still get taught because they are interesting and relevant. but it’s hard to see that as a kid, as you’re developing vocabulary and literacy and also lacking life experiences to relate.
Schools try to compromise by giving a list of choices and letting students choose from those on what is most interesting. But curriculums only flex so much.
they are interesting and relevant. but it’s hard to see that as a kid
Yeah so there’s this projection of, this is good and valuable to you, regardless what your circumstances and abilities are.
If it gets them writing essays and participating who cares?
Because analyzing themes and connecting it to history and sociology are important media literacy skills that high schoolers should be learning.
A Time to Kill won’t fulfill that?
The parents, apparently.
Schools are warehouses to hold children while parents are at work.
Public schools are. For high school, I went to a free online charter school. I received a substantially better education than my friends in the magnet public high school.
I get there are other problems with the whole ‘school choice’ debate, but my family was broke and I was still able to get a better education. That’s a plus imo and I’d recommend it to anyone.
If we forced rich people to send their children to public schools, public schools would get a lot better. By allowing them to have a choice, they choose to defund the public school.
If we forced rich people to send their children to public schools, they would all move to public school districts in areas with housing too expensive for poor families to afford. That’s not a hypothetical, that’s just current reality.
The problem is rich people, not what options they do or do not have.
That’s solvable with bussing, unless rich people all want to live out in the middle of nowhere in compounds or something.
The problem is rich people, which is why we should take away their options. They currently have the option to make rich-only school districts and we could take that away from them too. Point is, we have to force them to use the same school as everyone else.
Agree.
It’s an illusion either way. Public schools are funded by property taxes. property taxes are based on the home’s worth. So you see how this snowballs.
Property taxes keep getting cut and capped by people who don’t use public schools, because they don’t see the personal benefit to it.
This would have an effect.
Although pooling property taxes across entire states makes more sense than the weird school district thing we have going on.
I went to one of the worst schools in my state. The education was fine, schools are judged by their student body, not the teachers.
Graduated undergrad with a 4.0 in my engineering field, then got a doctorate from one of the most prestigious programs in the world. Now I’m a depressed techie waiting to FIRE, but I wouldn’t blame my public high school for that.
“FIRE”?
Financial Independence Retire Early
Ah, “paradise.” Good luck with that, genuinely.
“No child left behind” turned into “more children left behind.”
They weren’t left behind; they were trampled by the machine pushing them forward.
And, in retrospect, the reality of “No Child Left Behind” fits the MO of US governance: they are catering to the optics of “a child being held back in grade” and not to the actual issues that are preventing the child from learning.
Totally freeking agree. My family are all teachers and wow. The protocol for cellphones is you put them away at your cubby.
But now they’re bringing their real phones AND a dummy one to put in the pouches instead.
nd yes. AI destroying critical thinking skills. This generation is fucked. iPad parents as well.
Shortening attention spans with those “shorts” on YouTube and other places.
…just put signal jammers in each class in easy to reach spot for a teacher, sheesh. AI requires net, FB and Insta too. Nowadays kids don’t do offline so that should solve the problem.
because the schools don’t give a fuck about your kids.
News flash: it’s not just the schools, unfortunately.
They should ban that shit until you graduate college.the kids who are nerds will always figure out a way. The rest who are not into computers and such definitely should stay the fuck away. If you’re not careful you’ll become a zombie that works to pay for access to his brains as a rental subscription.
That’s just so messed up. It should not just be banned but down right illegal to sell an AI subscription if the data used was stolen from the public in the first place.
Yeah, if running AI took a fancy graphics card and some basic scripting knowledge, a lot of the short cutters would get filtered out right away. I’d rather write a four page paper than struggle to get a strange piece of software working on a deadline and I’m a tech-adjacent Linux enthusiast. The commercialization of AI is the problem: the fact that they’re preying on people’s desire to stand out, to be exceptional, to get positive social feedback, to succeed in the hierarchy, to make their over-packed lives easier, etc. Open-source Academic AI would have had a some of the same issues, like being coopted by governments, but in general I think things would be magnitudes less terrible.
I appreciate your last point about stolen data. I appreciated it from a marketing/intelligence/propaganda point-of-view, and you from the ownership/intellectual property point of view, but we ended up in really similar places.
Lol at the zombie thing too.
AI is ruining my workplace. Ban this shit full stop.
My college teacher be like: “I add AI to my Outlook email so it can automatically reply to emails using a lot of words”
I’m glad someone’s trying to do anything at all about it. People asking “what about at home”, it’s the parents fault then. Actually be involved with your kids lives…they won’t be in yours that long and it’s not a sacrifice to sit down with them and watch them do homework or anything at all really.
Do you realize how many parents work two full-time jobs? A lot, especially single parents. It’s not as simple as “spend more time with your kids” when every ‘free’ moment you have is spent driving, preparing food, or doing basic chores / hygiene routines.
I’ve worked many warehouse and similar jobs. There are a lot of parents who really love their children and express that by allowing themselves to be economically exploited every single minute of their life to guarantee their children a better future.
Sure, there are also parents who just don’t give a shit and park their kids on an iPad, but that has always been the case in one form or another. The trend where even caring parents are unable to spend enough time with their children is a consequence of a society-wide failure and the shameless embrace of capitalism.
I am a single parent full time job don’t make a whole lot of money if I lost my job we would be homeless within a few months and I still find time to sit with my child every day so I guess you’re right some people can some people can’t. I make it work I live below my means i pretty much buy nothing I have old clothes used clothes used furniture shop for food with coupons my cars 13 years old. I don’t know I guess?
Full time job, singular. I’ve known single parents who work two full-time jobs. Might be necessary for a variety of reasons. If they can financially work it out so they spend more time with their child and live below their means like you do, I 100% think that’s the smarter choice for their child’s wellbeing. But for some people it might not be feasible, for example if they have medical expenses or if they need to live near an older relative or tons of other reasons.
I understand, there’s always a ying to the yang.
It’s a start.
Mamdani is giving me major mayor dysmorphia.
Wish it were this:
Did you use generative AI to edit this image? lol jk
Then teach them media literacy and critical thinking skills.
I get it, and normally I would agree with you. however, teaching your kids the dangers of it and them falling to peer pressure is a problem as old as humans.
Imagine how bad the spread of drugs would be if schools actively promoted smoking meth in class. That is the problem we’re attempting to solve. If you legislate regulations for schools that say, “smoking meth in school is unacceptable” they stop promoting meth smoking in school.
If you read the article, thats part of it as well
No, it’s not.
I remember having study hall twice a week in high school and wondering why I didn’t just have a block of time like that every day to complete my assignments. It seems that having something like this with faculty supervising may be the only way to ensure AI isn’t being used.
Or assignments where you need to give a presentation (where you can use bullet points but need you put it in your own words on the fly) followed by Q&A. Could help with the crippling social anxiety that seems to be getting more common, too, if it was regular enough.
