What nonsense. First, the most important part in teaching is to select the materials and structure them in a way that makes sense. Second is the actual teaching and anybody halfway competent does far more than just reading the slides. It is about demonstrating you know your stuff, the materials are worthwhile working through, you respect the time of the participants and any good lecture will also need a real entertainment factor.

I think you have never designed and then held a lecture. And if you ever have heard lectures, apparently they were not any good.

Indeed. As an example, I currently have a student looking at all the major AIs (including coding ones with paid subscriptions) for code security review. With small, well known samples they are good. With larger samples, they are >50% fail. With CVEs (the things that matter) they are so far almost 100% fail.

Add that using AI coding assistants makes you about 20% slower, and the only thing AI could be called for this application is "completely unsuitable".

Indeed. I mean they have been subjected to slow for a full semester now. Anybody that does not see the limitations after that has a problem.

Hahaha, in 4 years the collapse of the hallucination that LLMs are actually very useful will have concluded. Things are already mightily crumbling. Those that apply themselves and learn stuff will find something worthwhile in 4 years. Obviously, with this mockery of teaching, that will be impossible, but real teaching is still being done. You just need to insist on it.

Tell that to those that place profits over everything else in life. Failures like Elon Musk that, despite all his money, obviously suffers from a deep (and justified) feeling of inadequacy.

The primary job of a lecturer is design of the lecture, select the material and structure it. That requires insight, experience and understanding of the target audience. The second most important thing is teaching the material and that requires a lot more than just standing there and reading the slides. In fact, just reading the slides is a complete fail. What you need to di is talk about what is ion the slides, signal what is important, how this relates to the rest of the world, what is the future perspective and, most important, do a bit of storytelling with real-world examples not on the slides, etc. The students must have the impression you know your stuff, and that you, as the lecturer, respect their time and provide something of value. That is what keeps them engaged and is critical for the learning effect. Things must be _interesting_ for them.

Hence this "course" is a complete fail and waste of time and essentially a scam. The students would have been much better served by being told to buy a specific book and to work through it.

I'm betting you used to get really worked up in those "hacker vs. cracker" arguments too.

And what's the deal with herbal "tea"?!

And see what the Pokemon shirt crowd thinks: Aww, too bad we don't get to talk about the science part because Slashdot is still crying about Trump.

Let's take all that money we were going to use to do something scientific and instead give it to the 500 pound unemployed single mom with nine kids and a $300 manicure so she can buy Oreos and bongs with it.

Which draws the AC's like flies. Thanks for playing.

Say hi to Xi for me.

How many TikTok "users" are completely passive, never posting and only viewing / listening? I'm guessing most of them.

Yes.

But, as usual, the enemies of privacy cannot stop pushing.

The whole thing is an obvious scam. Hence details do not matter.

Indeed. "Exciting" is for products you do not need.