Both are understandable.

School isn't a place where you just learn a series of facts about something. It's a place where you learn how to think critically.

Young children should NOT be using calculators or ChatGPT. Once they have more critical thinking skills, that's when you introduce the tools.

Good thing I got my online degree (it was mostly essay and project based as opposed to purely exam based) before Mr. GPT existed.

But now using the essay and project workaround for online classes to see if a student is avoiding the work doesn't do the trick in the era of Mr. G

Yes, it can also be literal

sub- word-forming element meaning "under, beneath; behind; from under; resulting from further division," from Latin preposition sub "under, below, beneath, at the foot of," also "close to, up to, towards;" of time, "within, during;"

Lmao in banned baby speak /cybersecurity. Should have prepared for your audit instead of scrambling to cover 😇

Well, I guess your prediction was technically correct but I don’t know how practical it is really to have such a wide window the bitch passes right through?

not what subtext means.

>The implicit meaning of a text, often a literary one, or a speech or dialogue.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/subtext

Prediction. /singularity user new language.compact. Effective

Yes, but that's still wild to me since chatgpt can make shit up and itself won't cite where it came from. It is a language model based on internet data.

Where it gets the data for what they'll cite is the issue, and something I can imagine as presenting a problem.

When we read other papers or articles, there's always a Bibliography you can use to go check out what they based their thoughts on.

Did you read the article, though?

"quote from content created by ChatGPT in their essays"

They're allowed to use it as a source, not to write an entire essay.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/27/chatgpt-allowed-international-baccalaureate-essays-chatbot

Wild eh?

And they was right! And today they also right!

1988?

I'm gushing right now. Your pathology is delightful. Go on... :-) ኢ🃏👩🏿‍💻🧑🏾‍🚀👩🏻‍⚖️👸🏼🥷🏾

Wow, so cool!!!

Unfortunately, claiming it's detectable is a defense that will only work in the short term. Very short term.

Oh no, you were OFFENDED.

So what happens?

Nothing. Be offended. Next time don't act like an idiot.

Let's get this over with:

• Sure it can make videos, but you can see they're fake.
• Sure it can make ok videos but it can't make full on movies.
• Sure it can make movies, but none would win awards anyway.
• Sure you can make Oscar worthy movies, but it's only because it's not interactive. It can't program or make games.
• Sure it can make some scripts, but it's full of errors.
• Sure it can make scripts that are pretty ok, but a programmers main job is to get requirements, communicate with stakeholder and get the main architecture right.
• Sure those people now bypass programmers completely and just deal with the AI directly, but it still can't merge that all with interactive art and make for example games.
• Sure it can make games, but they're pretty simple. A small team of programmers and designers could do the same.
• Sure it can make complex games better than any huge company, but it still fails to make it immersive.
• Sure the games are very immersive and can feel like a reality simulation, but you still need a team of people coming up with prompts all the time otherwise it's useless.
• Sure it can read your mind and give you exactly what you want, an Oscar worthy movie, an award winning game and museum worthy art, but it still is limited to the digital world.
• Sure it can make simple sculptures and paintings, but they're full of errors. It will never replace real manual labor.
• Sure it has replaced all manual and digital labor, and make everything better than humans do, but humans will always want stuff made by other humans even if by all means it's objectively worse.

Fair enough.

Judging by your reply you need some help to form full sentences already ;)

Using a tool to achieve a result sidesteps the question of competency, and that is what we measure in class. Not "can I ask someone else to do something for me".

Of course, classes need to change to accommodate tools available to everyone (and not favour just those with privileged access), but only the use of those tools to aid your own understanding, not to replace what you do. Riding 100m on a bike is not the same as running it. Performing multiplication manually is not the same as doing it on a calculator (if that aptitude is what is being tested). Handing in an essay that was written for you does not test your comprehension or knowledge of the subject matter.

Do you you think we don't have calculators in other countries?

It's pretty fair to have kids learn concepts first before allowing calculator usage.

Poor little baby with the crocodile tears after some failed internet trolling. Quit being a net negative.

EDIT: I mean, props for trolling ultranationalist Europeans, I guess? But keep the shit in the pig pen.

divide this last response by zero you think it's that easy to troll people? not by low effort gptposting.

[deleted]

No need to be rude.

Calculators are great when you need an exact answer or the problem has a lot of pieces. A lot of problems just require estimates, and many high schoolers and adults can’t do that.

If you ever work outside where your hands can get cold, wet, and/or dirty, you’ll understand that using your phone for math is not always convenient.

> ppl itt still assume there's any need for the corrupt istitution of schooling (forced domestication, factory work training)