1109
Anon is a T.A.
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
1109 points (98.1% liked)
Greentext
4402 readers
613 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Cheating in academia is the name of the game. There is a survivor bias here assuming the other 78 students didn't cheat. They're Learning how to not get caught. Building a better trap may simply yield a better better cheater. The proof ends up being in the work.
I still think honeypots are amusing AF.
i didnt have a big problem with cheating, except with the caveat if a test is weighted via averages, then it actively fucks over those who dont cheat, as the curve is set higher than it should.
Average-weighted tests can go die in a ditch
It just discourages cooperation leading up the the exam, because you actively benefit from your peers performing worse
it works when tests are graded where the intended score is not 100%. having a test basically be "not finished" shows which subjects on a test was not properly gone over, thus the curve would apply and remove said question from the exam. if it were to be graded in a 100% scale, the question would exist to not give the class a perfect score regardless.
I have average intelligence and maintained a 3.5 at a top bioengineering school. I barely went to lectures, and just made sure to stay on top of the material through online resources (we have literally everything ever available to us). Id say not being a dumbass is the name of the game.
It always surprises me when I interview new graduates now and they can't explain any of their projects or pass a basic software proficiency test that most intro classes should cover (I usually ask them to write code to reverse complement a DNA sequence.. just swap out some letters and reverse a string, I do include the rules in the prompt). I think cheating is really rampant in software students.
Not trying to invalidate your experience, but I bet a portion of that could be explained by the brain-dump method students are conditioned for in grade schools before college.
I graduated from software engineering but still until this point, I loathe using one of the chatbots to make the code I want to make work on my own. I've used it twice to ask about how to organize a big software project but that was it. I am just a couple years older than the interns at my office but...damn...they are abusing chatgpt to get stuff done, albeit barely, because intern intelligence never ceases to amaze, and it's funny to watch.
If they wanna cheat, they should at least learn or practice that which they try to cheat xd
Luckily chat bots are hot garbage at logic. They have no clue what they're doing at all, most of what they say is just easy/popular sources that don't work or at worst sorta work but will create huge bugs. Sure ai will get better, but imo chatgpt/llm won't replace real eng cause it sources from dumbasses like me
I have no issue using an AI bot to help write code, but from personal experience, you have to at least have a basic understanding of how to do what you're trying to do, otherwise you won't be able to fix the code your AI bot gave you. I've tried using a bot to just write entire programs for me, it never works out of me. I always have to go back and update and fix what it gave me so I actually have a working product in the end but I'm also only doing scripting so that might make it easier to get by with a bot.
I think it's my gamer experience talking, but once I realized games were more enjoyable without cheats, it opened my eyes. I think I might be going through the same with my coding adventures. It feels more...rewarding to make the code work after trying and trying until it's all good.
There was an early episode of Naruto that involved a test that was nigh impossible for someone of their grade level. The actual purpose of the test was to see how good they were at cheating without getting caught, which would translate to their ability to gather information in enemy territory. I think about that a lot.
Reminded of Space Cadet:
Cheat (open your eyes) -> score is too high -> fail
Keep eyes closed -> laughably low score -> perfect!
Star Trek version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru
At a certain point though, you've just plain done the work. If you jump through enough hoops to cheat then you have to know the material well enough. Like doing a bunch of editing passes on downloaded papers.
Makes me think of the Key & Peele sketch where the bank robbers' plan is to get jobs at the bank and get steal the money week after week in the form of paychecks.