‘But there is a difference between recognising AI use and proving its use. So I tried an experiment. … I received 122 paper submissions. Of those, the Trojan horse easily identified 33 AI-generated papers. I sent these stats to all the students and gave them the opportunity to admit to using AI before they were locked into failing the class. Another 14 outed themselves. In other words, nearly 39% of the submissions were at least partially written by AI.‘
Article archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20251125225915/https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/set-trap-to-catch-students-cheating-ai_uk_691f20d1e4b00ed8a94f4c01
Oh my god, you’re right. The number of .ml users that “learned their theory from someone else” instead of reading source texts is mind-boggling. To be fair, I don’t want to read 150yo texts to inform my own opinions, but moreso because I find them archaic in their reasoning, not because they’re dull and pompous (they are).
If you “learned your theory form someone else” you’re somebody’s goon, not a maxist.
Nearly every human on earth would be in that category. The whole basis of human knowledge is that we take the knowledge of others and build upon it
You build on the knowledge. Not the person.