<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7cfb0940-4573-69d9-7cfd-0d12541cd11e@gmail.com">AI,
Teaching, and "Our Willingness to Give Bullshit a Pass"
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dailynous.com/2023/01/05/ai-teaching-and-our-willingness-to-give-bullshit-a-pass/">https://dailynous.com/2023/01/05/ai-teaching-and-our-willingness-to-give-bullshit-a-pass/</a>
<br>
<br>
The first time I heard this argument was from these guys:
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.audible.com/pd/Pill-Pod-104-AI-the-New-Crisis-of-Humanities-Education-Podcast/B0BPQ77Z8P">https://www.audible.com/pd/Pill-Pod-104-AI-the-New-Crisis-of-Humanities-Education-Podcast/B0BPQ77Z8P</a>
<br>
<br>
My phrasing of the idea being that tools like ChatGPT are
analogous to calculators, allowing the computer to do what it's
good at and freeing humans up to do what we're good at. Why
require students to learn bullshit rhetorical styling when we can
teach them to think about the *substance* ... a lesson many of us
learned from Knuth's TeX a long time ago. The trick is that tools
like ChatGPT are built around the bullshit-generation use case.
What we need are tools built around the bullshit-detection use
case.
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>and is the introduction of GPTZero (and it's ilk) represent
closing the loop in an "antagonistic" pair to hone that BS
generator even faster?</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7cfb0940-4573-69d9-7cfd-0d12541cd11e@gmail.com">With
branch prediction, we could implant a little device just under the
eardrum that listened to someone's speech acts for a tiny
fraction, predict where it was going, and call bullshit or "pay
attention" for some interval. The bullshitters' rhetoric would
never even reach your audio perception devices. ... like trigger
warnings for all of us sensitive snowflakes who can't bear to look
on images of Mohammed
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/01/05/hamline-university-assailed-for-firing-professor-who-showed-images-of-muhammads-face/"><https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/01/05/hamline-university-assailed-for-firing-professor-who-showed-images-of-muhammads-face/></a>.<br>
</blockquote>
<p>With a nod to our resident trans/post-humanist(s), our perceptual
circuits *already* select for what they have been trained to
see/hear/smell/taste/feel some things
more/better/easier/differently than others. So jacking that up
with pass-through AR technology is totally "obvious"... and
therefore a "good idea"?<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:7cfb0940-4573-69d9-7cfd-0d12541cd11e@gmail.com">
<br>
Those of us who've kissed the Blarney Stone, unfortunately, would
spend our lives talking to brick walls.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>But with things developing as they are, the brick walls would be
capable of a much more interesting dialogue, perhaps, than people
(though given nay will be post/trans-humans, WTF?). A wall of
(otherwise) bricked smart-devices programmed just to be contrarian
with your syntax and logic constructions?</p>
<p>I think this is probably where we are headed: </p>
<div align="center"><img moz-do-not-send="true"
src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/Astound4707.jpg"
alt="" width="503" height="670"></div>
<div align="center"><a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_Folded_Hands"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_Folded_Hands</a></div>
</body>
</html>