It is weird that the article does not mention Bezos given that he is the biggest name associated with both entities.

You asked for an alternative strategy... there is a free tool for this: RevisionHistory.com

It's chrome plugin for Google Docs that analyzes the doc's revision history and gives stats about how it was constructed. For example, it will tell you how many copy/pastes, how many of them were big copy/pastes, how long the student spent on the assignment. You can even do a replay which shows the document being written at high-speed to help understand the student's writing / thinking process. The student does not need to install anything. He merely needs to write his paper from start-to-finish in a Google Doc and then when complete, use the built-in share feature to give the instructor read permissions.

Students won't cheat, if they know they will get caught.

But also, students should be allowed to use LLMs as part of their learning process, but perhaps not for every assignment.

If everyone is cheating and you expel them all, there will be no one left.

A far better approach for this professor would be to use a tool like RevisionHistory.com

Itâ(TM)s a totally free chrome plugin that gives stats on how a document was constructed, by analyzing the revision history. It will tell you how many copy/pastes there were, the size of them, and will even let the user to do a âoereplayâ to watch the document being written at high speed to help understand the student process. The student does not need to install anything, but merely needs to use a Google Doc to write their essay and when done, share it with the instructor.

Students will cheat, unless they expect to get caught.

The best penalty is a zero grade with an opportunity to do it over.

When the POTUS breaks the law, the remedy is impeachment. The purpose of the 25th Amendment is to establish succession in the event that the POTUS is unable to serve due to health. If you think Biden was a criminal, then why didn't the Republicans impeach him? They certainly had the motive and means to do so. They held hearing about it, but their arguments were not backed by facts, so they had no choice but to back down. Meanwhile, Trump is the only president who has been impeached twice, both times with bipartisan support.

While Trump pledging to "be a dictator on day one" is not a crime, refusing to accept the 2020 election when he knew he lost was a violation of his constitutional oath. Once you break that oath in such a such a stark fashion, why would the public allow him to take that oath again? The answer is simply that our society doesn't care about the rule of law. Apparently, the public is more swayed by xenophobia and resentment to global inflation.

When the president promises to be a dictator on day 1, how can he even be administered the oath of office to uphold and protect the constitution? Laws do not mean anything unless society is willing to enforce them.

If the metric system is so intuitive, why did the article mention millions of km instead of simply referring to terameters?

Simply put, miles and km are both standards because of their relationships to the length of our legs.

Whatâ(TM)s your partnerâ(TM)s profession?
1. S.T.E.M
2. Education
3. Medical
4. Retail
5. Finance
6. Other / Construction / Energy / Agriculture
7. Iâ(TM)m single, you insensitive clod!

This comment is a perfect example of why ChatGPT and generative AI in general will not be revolutionary. Sure, it will sometimes create amazing things (unlike the above comment), but it will take a lot of human time and energy to sift through all the generated content to decide what's relevant and insightful. Furthermore, human attention in general will be in even shorter supply because AI generated content will continue to create progressively more tantalizing distractions.

If you're gonna post an excerpt from ChatGPT, don't just say it's a "fun read" but explain *why*. Either highlight the relevant part or, for love of Cthulhu, provide a TL;DR.

The insight here is that should a significantly more advanced civilization exist within our galaxy, we won't be able to see them, but they will be able to see us. Will they want to help us along, take our shit, or just be completely indifferent to us?

This is basically worthless for detecting any civilization, except for one that looks almost exactly like our own at roughly the same point in our history. But the thing is, we are at a rare inflection point in our development. Either we will clean up our act and our air, or we run out of time and self-destruct instead.

The article's proposed method of detecting industrial pollution in an exoplanetary atmosphere would be more likely to detect an extinct civilization than an active one. If a civilization is able to make it a couple hundred years past where we are technologically, they will likely have fusion figured out and be able to detoxify their atmosphere, and so we won't be able to detect them for long. On the other hand, if they run out of time and die out, their pollution will linger for much longer, like the stench of a rotting corpse on a planetary scale.

The article doesn't comment on it, but I wonder if the JWST would be able to detect the signature of a nuclear armageddon?

What does âoeAâ stand for?

Iâ(TM)d love to be able to (very) occasionally hang out with friends who live far away.

Waiting for us to build a Dyson Sphere, then all the messages will start pouring in.

Thank you for sharing this deeply personal story. I shared it with someone in my life who is agonizing over paying for IVF vs doing a selective abortion if the 1 in 4 variant presents.