Post

Notice the example also lists other high prestige languages as being irrelevant and so through not even mentioning them other lesser important to the AI bro languages* don't even exist. It's not a coincidence it's French and German being compared to Sanskrit and Latin.

The insistence memorization is obsolete is hilarious too — but also obviously incredibly pedagogically dangerous. Imagine what that would mean in practice. Nobody can learn to read anymore since the alphabet needs to be memorised. We can't start debating what each letter is or guessing.

Also handwriting? Imagine the future members of society not being able to write without a keyboard. It effectively means that no human writing (if they don't learn handwriting) can ever be done outside surveillance devices since all computers have this propensity these days.

Coding... Yeah, that's one of the worst ones in terms of how the industry is in essentially ruins and largely ununionised. The whole debate around using these so-called tools in coding is no different to any other bothsidesism that destroys skills and expertise.

Apparently, some are already learning to read by guessing and the method has been in use since 80s It does not bring good results but it does explain a lot of weird online fights where someone swoops in completely misunderstanding what was said since their reading skill is based on assumptions

yes, it's pretty obvious to us as educators especially sadly — in part why I started with this topic

part 2.1 > We have to get this out of the way: do you have time to properly read most of this article? [I will] answer from three very different perspectives: PhD student, faculty, layperson. Each of these [have] distinct, although not mutually exclusive goals. critical.computer/reading/#tim...

If we don't have some things memorized, what would we have to think with? Constantly having to reach out to something outside our minds is not viable. Memorizing things that we don't need to think with may be obsoleted, but even that has benefits for brain growth I read.

Currently reading The Psychology of Software Teams by @grimalkina.bsky.social, and she mentions in passing people cramming for tests but not acquiring deep knowledge. Does "AI" appeal to the kind of people who did that? When it's about regurgitating words but not having real understanding?

Speculation: the kind of person who crammed for tests and did OK might have learned that expertise is bullshit that anyone can fake easily, so will think an "AI" doing the same but cheaply is a good thing. The people who seem most opposed to "AI" seem to be experts with hard-won knowledge/skills.

He's a notorious 'contrarian' right wing fuckwit, no more than a sad and tiresome troll at this point. 'The exercise of sound judgment' from the bloke who spent decades pushing for brexit with no plan is quite something.

I suppose what I struggle with is the question of whether its worth spending energy fighting these disingenuous weasels, or whether it's better spent building positive, thoughtful, collaborative, caring, welcoming practices and places. I dont know how much of the former is worthwhile.

First of all, yes, sometimes you need to fight them in the streets like with the Nazis and then you need to keep going and educate people more. Second of all, yes, welcome to the club! Let's build nice things.

Happy Friday! Here's a site I've built because I've been thinking about it & want to see more of it in the world: a space for describing and sharing scholarly skills that I've picked up and nurtured over the years. Also this is a no AI zone in at least two ways: no talking about it and no using it.