Post

(2 of 2) so only to the uneducated may this flailing attempt to create an art may sound like music. To anyone with any education in music, it starts to sound like noise with the greater the education the more mistakes one will find. That is AI writing anything. It does not make up for real skills.

I feel so bad stumbling into this as a layman whom uses AI in fiction writing to circumvent days my disabilities leave my hands and brain a mess - I still have to say AI use curtails rather than facilities the development of the intensive depth in written communication skills for this writing.

*you're

If you didn't do the work, you don't get to take credit for it. My community college students understand this, and yet somehow the Chronicle and a Middlebury professor apparently do not.

Don't know how that is pertinent, says the political science professor. Unless you mean it is pertinent because she is at Middlebury?

Living wage is a pretty darn good reason too.

🎯 Nothing is actually being analyzed.

the Chronicle of Getting High on Trashing Education

but AI writing is dogshit so what’s your point

They've been pushing hard the idea that AI is already part of institutions and that we have no say. As if society magically has the infrastructure to support a society where AI knows everything and we don't. As if we want a society where the people " writing" the papers don't understand the field.

I suppose if I copy someone else's work you should not evaluate the source, only the quality, so I get to profit from it? Your article is literally behind a paywall... Wtf, I thought the source didn't matter, only the message... Why can't I sell your work as my own?!?!

If you didn’t write it, you didn’t write it and should receive a 0.

If you expect a human to read it, a human should write it. Don’t insult my intelligence by sending me clanker slop.

"If paying other people to do your academic writing is now part of academic writing, what should institutions actually evaluate? This essay argues...." bsky.app/profile/sean...

I advise the author to eat glass

Using AI to both generate and scan academic 'writing' is the computer equivalent of a human centipede.

Why is plagiarism ok so long as it’s done by a supercomputer?

"We should judge analytical writing by its quality, not its source" -- hey look, there is an "academic" who endorses plagiarism.

Jesus Christ. When I was in college, plagiarism was the unforgivable sin. What is different about this?

If you don't understand how you can't have good quality without good sources, then your education has failed you.

There’s a clear next step- Why even have people evaluate the writing? Just ask AI if the AI-produced writing is good. That way we can all get back to what is important-

Tripe is a great word - thank you - I can add that to “drivel”

I hope this sparks a long needed search for the soul and purpose of political science (I say as a political scientist). There are competing visions of political science and I hope this one loses

Ridiculous, paid-for-by-AI-companies trash. @chronicle.com is now worthless trash itself.

So academia is fucked then.

Plagiarism is plagiarism

lol

WHAT THE ACTUAL CAPITULATING FUCKING BULLSHIT PRO-CORPORATE, PRO-FASCIST IS THIS? When the AI comes for your job I plan on drinking myself stupid in joy. Assholes.

It admits as much at the bottom of the "article".

Who cares if you can actually think? wtf.

If plagiarism is now part of academic writing, what should institutions actually evaluate? This essay argues that analytical writing should be judged by evidence, structure, argument, and accountability not by guesses about how each sentence was produced.

If you didn't bother to write it why should anyone bother to read it? Why have higher education at all? Let's just "write" everything with AI! Then no one needs to learn or challenge themselves in any way!

God this is embarrassing.

if some dumbass can't do their fucking job & research something there's no fucking way i'm going to read it

@allisonstanger.bsky.social If this is your piece I am very disappointed.

"Should academic papers to be plagiarized? 'Maybe so' says the creator of PlagiarismMachineBeta2000" It feels very bad faith to start from a position of "Well, we're gonna allow AI to write papers, now what" rather than "Should we let people use programs go write their work for them" Still no, btw

Can I get paid for my terrible opinions too? I have lots of them

What absolute trash.

Okay are you gonna ask for less money in your grant applications because you do less of the work?

I hope everyone remembers the name and shame the journal. It should have been rejected if it was AI generated.

🙋🏼‍♀️ me i care it’s me

Hey here's a thought, we could make it not a part of academic writing

yeah no thanks

Why would any academic worth their salt surrender their own voice?

Are you fucking serious

Total capitulation. Pathetic.

depends. If you mean some insidious integrated exploit then it is basically a "linux distro" situation when you depend on nebulous and somewhat chaotic infosec community, enthusiast circles and enterprises that shit-tested your tooling. If you mean like, in terms of hallucinations / dumbs, then >

any academic who embraces this mindset hates their profession and themselves

Scab.

If oligarchs demand AI is now part of academic writing, how should institutions normalize it? This essay argues that analytical writing should be judged by whatever evidence their concentrated capital interests desire.

Putting my name on the textbook and handing it in.

WTF is the image? A human hand and a mechanical hand on a stripper pole ? Did AI pick the illustration ?

"should be judged by evidence, structure, argument, and accountability" If you're having AI write your paper, I don't think you're going to be judged very favorably on those criteria either.

I argued the same thing after they discovered I bought my essay from someone online. If the essay was good, why make such a hullabaloo about who actually wrote it?

Fuck you. Oh, fuck you fuck you fuck you. For betraying professors and students with this take, fuck you

If the author couldn’t be bothered to write it, why should I be bothered to read it?

Oh so if you don't care how each sentence is produced, then, surely your stance against the plagiarism scandals surrounding black and brown professors that get blown way out of proportion is to put those issues to rest as the nothing burgers that they are... right? Will I be surprise if I google it?

I dunno, basic reading comprehension and checking your work is usually a good place to start lads - that’s something that writing in academia should be teaching you 🙃

Three quick questions: 1) Should journals accept plagiarized writing? (No) 2) Is failing to cite sources still considered plagiarism? (Yes) Now, the tricky one: 3) When an AI writes something, does it cite its sources? (Hint: The trained weights do not encode citation data.)

So I don't need to study, I don't need to learn anything, and I don't have to understand what I'm talking about? Just get a machine to write the answers, and that's it, I'm qualified? Can you even hear yourself when you write such absolutely mindless bullshit?

Maybe someday, in the misty distance, you’ll read the goddamn room or you know just take a look at the vibe of the country. Once that happens, you’ll stop this silly shit.

Lazy people use tools to cover that they’re lazy and unqualified

I mean, they're not writing or doing the academic work they claim they're doing. It's a plagiarism engine. Pretty cut and dry fraud to claim something is your work when you didn't do the work.

Your opinion is bad and you should feel ashamed for this treason against your own humanity

AI was built by theft. It's a version of plagiarism. So there's that.

Tell the writer of this bullshit, Allison Stanger, that I saw her at a store angrily shouting for a manager because they wouldn’t accept a coupon from her ChatGPT LLM before weepily asking it to write this fucking article.

If you input a prompt for the chatbot to expand into a paper, and then the reader inputs the paper for the chatbot to summarize into something shorter, why not just write the prompt to the reader?

I care!

It seems that way! But then I think--although it's hard to get an exact number--the percentage of colleges that actually have meaningful audiences for their sports must be low, like 5-10%

If AI is part of academic writing you should fail. No grading you just fail the entire class

"Because I was first trained as a mathematician, I probably write more like an AI than most people" This did direct psychic damage.

Maybe institutions shouldn't, you know, just accept that AI can be part of academic writing...

It should be judged on whether you learned anything. What are we even doing here?

Go fuck yourself

Fuck off with your AI simping

You have become a complete joke

Fuck you

The idea that plagiarism using a machine that hallucinates data and citations has no bearing on "evidence, structure, argument, and accountability" is laughable.

Oh, fuck off.

Been in IT for decades. Machine learning for about a third of that. And unsurprisingly, this is complete drivel.

Who cares if marathon runners use motorcycles? Since motorcycles can be used in racing, should we make sure that they actually ran every single mile on foot?

Go fuck yourself for this absolute drivel. Who the fuck do you think you are?

If you think it’s so great, then let AI write for you next time.

the test results said I only had a 1-2% chance of recurrence or metastasis but when I saw AI in the fine print I lost a lot of confidence in it- also noticed my family doc has asked to record our visits which I allowed because I thought it would help, but now I'm thinking his summaries are AI too

Its purely now a revenue stream by design and intent. When OpenAI started, it was nonprofit. Then they were like "hey... $$$" It will never (be allowed) truly "help" people, just the people who own it - making them richer.

Sadly, I fear that's where we're heading...

I care. I want evidence of critical human thinking and the ability to convey ideas, not the practice of surrendering thought and craft to a plagiarism machine.

Did AI write this for you?

Well, precisely. The original author isn't the main loser from plagiarism; the main loser is the reader, who believes that Y wrote it when in fact X did. Here the reader believes that Y wrote it when X=AI.

I’m way more concerned about the validity of the data.

just put it into the slop machine and ask what it thinks, garbage in and garbage out baybee

I recently read an article in a Q1 journal in which the authors did not know how to differentiate between generative AI, artificial intelligence, and chatbots, and used the terms interchangeably. Writing is more than a series of prompts. Sentence construction reveals a multitude of sins.

Oh, ffs. Did you have AI write this? Only people who make money off this technology think it's as good as the real thing. The real thing is superior to AI *even if the result is identical* because higher education is about the one being educated not the result. I'm surprised you haven't learned that

Definitely blocking each of the twelve dipshits that liked this piece of crap spit out by Claude.

eliminate all majors except "prompt engineering." might finally have the money to compensate administrators like they think they deserve

Any of you can quit at any time. Make room for people who want to do the actual work. That’s an option; that’s possible.

Publishing a pro-plagiarism opinion piece should be an embarrassment for everyone involved.

It is not, and it must not be.

Call her Allison Strangler because I hope she chokes.

Passing off LLM-generated text as your own is plagiarism of perhaps the worst kind and it should be judged as such.

Wrong

What do they say about opinions and assholes?

If the process itself has been bypassed by outsourcing it to AI, there's nothing to evaluate.

If you cannot clearly write in your own words what you want others to understand about a subject then you do not understand said subject well enough yourself