... Did they really phrase it that way? If so, that would be the most *sshole move I've seen by corporate douchebags in a long time. And if so I can't wait for the bots to replace those folks too.
Obviously AI is taking most of the whitecollar jobs. This isn't really news anymore IMHO.
I can't tell you how relieved I am right now that I took a breadless diploma in performing arts mostly just based on personal interest, with zero concrete career aspirations in mind. The arts helped me with every aspect of life, personal, private, public and job, even though it was completely breadless.
That my days making money by developing software are numbered is obvious to me too. I got incredibly lucky with my current gig but since have morphed into an entire team of software experts with me as the lead basically telling AI what to program. Never been this productive. It's only a matter of time that AI will take my current position too.
Here's the harsh reality: AI doesn't work.
Looking at AI doing the job I just did a year ago I'd say AI is working pretty good. Better than me in fact. And waaaay faster. Basically replacing an entire team of developers.
Curiously enough, what won't be working for long anymore is Facebook itself, when it's just AI talking to each other. I never got why FB had a business case in the first place. But then again, I'm a computer expert that isn't to bedazzled about the ability to upload text, images and video to the internet.
If Ebola catches on and goes viral globally it will be a very serious problem. A true pandemic. The current death toll for Ebola infections is around 50%. We're talking Resident Evil/28 days later/I am Legend type shit.
I never quite got all the noise and hysteria about vaccinations going during CoViD 19 on either side and I always said we should - either way - be glad that it's just CoViD 19 and not Ebola 19.
If we now actually have global Ebola 26/27 on the menu, the fecal matter is going to hit the rotary air impeller at levels that will make SARS v2 / CoViD 19 look like a laid-back undressed rehersal during a beach vacation. I sure do effing hope this does _not_ happen.
Either way, I already got my Goggles, professional filter masks, water-filter, cooking gear and gas, etc. when the last reports about a SARS variant came around last Winter. I'm sure as eff not getting caught in some apocalyptic level pandemic without being (somewhat) prepared. That much I learned from CoViD. And everyone else should've too. It would be quite dumb to die an unpreventable death just because you where to cheap to drop 150 Euros on some basic survival gear.
... that this sort of problem you're describing is one where having a monotheic revelation cult like Christianity, Judaeism or Islam as a your cultural foundation can actually make sense and come with quite a few benefits. Having the universe humbling you does seem easier if you humanize it with a stern god that punishes hedonism and misbehavior in a world of abundance. One of the countless benefits such a cult does bring along.
... throughout the developed world. Especially for college grads. Same thing here in Germany too. The rate of unemployed academics has surpassed that of trades people, just like in the US. It's AI. Mostly.
... he sure is effing serious about getting us back into space. Good stuff, like it!
Imagine an AI tutor perfectly matched to a student's talents and learning speed, supplemented by a human teacher.
Ok, I'm imagining a class of high school students breaking the guardrails, getting it to report that they're doing brilliantly and deserve A+ while they watch tiktok... at the very least they'll make it say racist things and publish that on tiktok for the lulz. It'll also find a way to organically mention how much its been hearing that everyone else really likes new Pepsi Cherry Zero on a daily basis too.
Is that not the outcome you were imagining too?
Imagine learning physics from a virtual Einstein or Feynman
Oooh... yes please, i can't wait for virtual Feyman prefacing his lectures with the lords prayer, explaining how God created the universe and all the physics in it; and also: you look thirsty, there is a Pepsi machine with new Pepsi Cherry Zero in the hallway; have you tried it?
Einstein meanwhile extols the virtue of Zionist colonization in Palestine...
Wait? Do you actually think that it would go differently? If we create puppets of brilliant revered thinkers they'll inevitably say whatever slop some combination of political appointees and advertising companies want them to say. Why on earth would anyone think they would be used for anything else?
Its frequently used on general elective courses because they're big enough (often hundreds of students) that the statistical variation between student cohorts fits normal curves pretty well.
To adopt the same approach for mainline courses is to transform the entire university from a place of learning into a credentials broker or diploma mill.
That doesn't even make sense. The defining characteristic of a credential mill is that it passes everyone who goes. A curve grading system assigns Fs and Ds and C- to the bottom of every class.
Meanwhile, at Harvard, right now, everyone who goes and shows up to class passes, and half of them get As. How is that not "essentially a credential mill" right now?
Even more damning, a generation ago 25% of them got As. What's your theory on that? Harvard students this generation are just a lot smarter and more studious and they're mastering the material at a much higher rate? Or that Harvard is handing As out like participation trophies now?
I know where my money is at. And Harvard's own teaching staff agrees.
Your splitting hairs. The OP complained that having your grade affected by the grades of your peers was wrong. Then you said, well it would be fine if they based the grades on the "top score" which is still having your grade determined by what (one of) your peers did.
If your 40% on the exam would be an A if the brightest kid got a 44% but would be a B+ if the brightest kid got a 48%, I doubt the OP would be any "happier" with that situation.
... they're about selection. Mix those two things up and you won't get very far in solving this.
So by your definition, if there is a class of the best students that ever existed, a certain percentage should get an "F" to meet a quota?
It's this sort of South-Korean / Japanese style non-sense that has people work themselves to death or young people kill themselves.
If grade inflation is hurting the Havard brand, that's entirely on them and only happens if you make education a business as the US Ivy league does. Find objective criteria, document and publish them and rate the students by them. Problem solved. If more students get "A"s, then that's because the students and/or your teaching has gotten better.
This whole debate reveals what grades are really about. Not about education, but selection.
... point:
But YOU WILL USE AI for coding is here for non mission critical applications.
Nope. For generic stuff I would, as of now, trust the AI to do mission critical stuff better than any human as well. Point in case: Just yesterday the newest Codex fixed an oversight of mine while doing another task and _explained_ to me that he/she/it was fixing an oversight in order to properly do that other thing I asked for. This was a non-trivial detail concerning state management and recovery in a non-trivial SPA. Something a human would've needed a day or two for fixed in 3 minutes. That wasn't AI just coding, that was AI doing an architecture decision on it's own(!!) to fix the oversight. That's how far we've come with AI as of yesterday.
The biggest part of my job is for me to keep track of what we actually get done and document it after reviewing the code. And, yes, I have never had colleagues this competent either. I've mutated to a primary senior architect with a expert team of 20 within less than a year. If I were to still code myseld, I'd be the bottleneck. And a serious one. So, yeah, basically your assessment is spot on with my AI experience so far.
My daughter recently took a course where the average final exam score was around 30%. Nobody hit 50%. Nobody completed the test. They were graded on the curve, as everyone expected they would be, and the A's, B's and C's were distributed pretty appropriately in the end.
In your world, apparently this was simply the dumbest cohort of 4th year university students ever to walk the halls, and they all deserved an F ??
Or maybe, just maybe, it was a brutally difficult exam.
Grading on the curve works perfectly fine if you realize that the student cohorts tend to be more consistent than the tests are from professor to professor, year to year.
The only way "your way" makes any sense at all at approaching fairness is if the tests are standardized... but that creates a whole whack of new problems. -- If the test is standardized, then students are incentivized to just study the test, not the material. Meanwhile, In many advanced degree courses, the material taught from semester to semester varies by professor and year for the same course. How do you standardize the test when even the material is variable?
"This is fucking stupid."
Unsurprisingly the teaching staff at Harvard know a lot more about this than you do.
High level undergrad course work, and graduate level course work isn't like a primary school arithmetic or spelling test.
It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.
