I heard a student claim that AI is the only thing she had to use. This is in law, which has wild amounts of research and explanatory resources. But industry thinks the same thing: AI is inevitable and one simply must use it, no matter its obvious flaws. Honestly, it’s group think and propaganda.

Show Post

Do you have space in your calendar to dedicate half a lecture to reading them this thread and ask them to talk about it? Because I think they're great questions, phrased compassionately and without denying them dignity, and only they can give you anything other than supposition.

Show Post

This is the main reason I'm glad I'm not teaching anymore. This would make me want to pull my hair out. But also, I think they are learning something -- not about your subject -- but about the uses and pitfalls of AI. They are learning about the interface. To what end? Who knows

Show Post

In comes this tool that is marketed as a) instant and b) authoritative. It’s exactly what they don’t need and the guardrails we set up (liberal extension policies, peer review) don’t stop a lot of people from going to the authority-shaped thing to their own detriment.

Show Post

This thread about students using AI mirrors how I feel about a lot of attorneys who use AI and how I think we need to understand this trend better. In some ways I think widespread wholesale rollout of LLMs was exactly what we didn’t need in this moment: people are insecure, and feel overwhelmed

Show Post