(1/5) I want to share a personal story today.
-
(1/5) I want to share a personal story today. This will be a thread, so please bear with me.
I’m pursuing a master’s degree in digital society alongside my work. Yesterday, I started to attend a course on research methods in the social sciences. The lecturer told us that our assignment would be to perform a research task using a slop machine.
I protested, of course, making my case why I considered using slop machines in research and educational highly unethical. (...)@r_alb this story made my head spin.
I have so many questions, starting from how it is posssible that they actually encourage students/demand of them using llm in research at this particular course of studies.
Maybe the lecturer wanted to show the students how this thing hallucinates and how to deal with that? I.e. never trust what it gives you? I can't see any other reason.
Anyway, congrats! You stood up for yourself and two other people in the room.
-
@r_alb this story made my head spin.
I have so many questions, starting from how it is posssible that they actually encourage students/demand of them using llm in research at this particular course of studies.
Maybe the lecturer wanted to show the students how this thing hallucinates and how to deal with that? I.e. never trust what it gives you? I can't see any other reason.
Anyway, congrats! You stood up for yourself and two other people in the room.
@barabasz
I thought (and argued) pretty much the same, yes. But the plan was cerainly not to show us how unreliable those machines are. Apparently, they are already widely used in research projects, which in my opinion raises so many ethical and methodological concerns.
But I'm afraid the unwarranted hype creeps into every nook and cranny. -
(4/5) So when the lecturer asked (as a kind of courtesy to me I guess) who’d vote for another method, not just one, but three hands shot up.
The lecturer looked at us, paused (maybe contemplating what it would mean if three people left the course under legitimate protest), and then just said „Okay, then the three of you will be a team and use the other method.“
Viewed objectively, this wasn’t a big victory, to be honest. After all, everyone else will still be using the slop machine. (...)@r_alb guess you 3 are a rather representative number of people who have not suffered total brain rot yet
🤬I hate this timeline
-
@r_alb guess you 3 are a rather representative number of people who have not suffered total brain rot yet
🤬I hate this timeline
@TheOneDoc
So do I!
But three out of 14 is still better than just one. At least we're not alone in this, is what I'm trying to say. -
@TheOneDoc
So do I!
But three out of 14 is still better than just one. At least we're not alone in this, is what I'm trying to say.@r_alb hmm I actually expected something like 3 out of 30 to 35 so that's a really good number.
I'll never understand why people seem to avoid thinking as if it would give 'em massive pain.
-
@r_alb hmm I actually expected something like 3 out of 30 to 35 so that's a really good number.
I'll never understand why people seem to avoid thinking as if it would give 'em massive pain.
@TheOneDoc
I guess capitalism taught them that doing stuff yourself isn't "efficient" enough while also marketing their notion of "efficiency" as the one true fetish. Nothing new though, this ploy precedes the slop machine. -
@TheOneDoc
I guess capitalism taught them that doing stuff yourself isn't "efficient" enough while also marketing their notion of "efficiency" as the one true fetish. Nothing new though, this ploy precedes the slop machine.@r_alb nah most people are just idiots that only exist to waste resources and Democracies jast aren't designed with that fact in mind.
It's like unregulated markets. They are bound to colapse and the "solution" for both is a regular reset and tight regulation but that's off topic.
Sorry for ranting.
I always wonder how nice a world we could have if they all would just be gone
-
@r_alb nah most people are just idiots that only exist to waste resources and Democracies jast aren't designed with that fact in mind.
It's like unregulated markets. They are bound to colapse and the "solution" for both is a regular reset and tight regulation but that's off topic.
Sorry for ranting.
I always wonder how nice a world we could have if they all would just be gone
@TheOneDoc
Don't you worry, this is a "ranting encouraged" zone.
However, I want to be a litte more optimistic than you are. Or I'm just coming from a an angle that is a bit different.I think that what most people are lacking these days is an intuitive understanding of the externalities of what they're doing. That it was makes them act stupid over and over again.
-
(5/5) But at least we stood firm on our principles and managed to defend another aspect of our lives against being encroached on by slop machines.
On a more personal level, it really meant the world to me that my colleagues obviously weren’t opting for the „easy“ way, as everyone else did, but instead had made the ethical choice together with me. Not being alone in this situation really felt so good, and I realize how much I needed this tiny act of joint defiance right now.@r_alb I think you’re doing more than that. I think you are demonstrating to the class that there is more to research than writing a paper. The learning is in the researching, not in producing the output.
This story has made me happy.
-
@r_alb I think you’re doing more than that. I think you are demonstrating to the class that there is more to research than writing a paper. The learning is in the researching, not in producing the output.
This story has made me happy.
@gdinwiddie
Thank you, and I'm glad to hear that! -
@TheOneDoc
So do I!
But three out of 14 is still better than just one. At least we're not alone in this, is what I'm trying to say.@r_alb @TheOneDoc 3/14 roughly matches my intuitive-heuristic expectation for the ratio of people who want to learn, in any class. Most just want to pass in the most efficient way.
-
E em0nm4stodon@infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
(5/5) But at least we stood firm on our principles and managed to defend another aspect of our lives against being encroached on by slop machines.
On a more personal level, it really meant the world to me that my colleagues obviously weren’t opting for the „easy“ way, as everyone else did, but instead had made the ethical choice together with me. Not being alone in this situation really felt so good, and I realize how much I needed this tiny act of joint defiance right now. -
@r_alb this story made my head spin.
I have so many questions, starting from how it is posssible that they actually encourage students/demand of them using llm in research at this particular course of studies.
Maybe the lecturer wanted to show the students how this thing hallucinates and how to deal with that? I.e. never trust what it gives you? I can't see any other reason.
Anyway, congrats! You stood up for yourself and two other people in the room.
-
@noodlemaz @barabasz @r_alb
I think it’s all down to the way education is seen: it’s not a means to grow minds and think, it’s a process to be completed so that the student can move through the education system and emerge as functioning droids.
This has always been the goal under capitalism - to make more workers but it used to be that capitalism also required workers who could do analysis and make improvements. That role has been assigned to genAI. -
(1/5) I want to share a personal story today. This will be a thread, so please bear with me.
I’m pursuing a master’s degree in digital society alongside my work. Yesterday, I started to attend a course on research methods in the social sciences. The lecturer told us that our assignment would be to perform a research task using a slop machine.
I protested, of course, making my case why I considered using slop machines in research and educational highly unethical. (...)@r_alb as a lecturer who also teaches research methods and refuses any kind of llm, I'm so glad to read this! thanks for sharing!
-
@r_alb as a lecturer who also teaches research methods and refuses any kind of llm, I'm so glad to read this! thanks for sharing!
@tizlit
Thank you for doing it! I hope you're not the only one at your workplace! -
@noodlemaz @barabasz @r_alb
I think it’s all down to the way education is seen: it’s not a means to grow minds and think, it’s a process to be completed so that the student can move through the education system and emerge as functioning droids.
This has always been the goal under capitalism - to make more workers but it used to be that capitalism also required workers who could do analysis and make improvements. That role has been assigned to genAI.@OneInterestingFact
Sad but true! -
@noodlemaz
In my opinion, the issue is that the ethical implications of using slop machines in education (or for any other purpose) are usually ignored. I get why teachers feel pressure to somehow include those models into their classes. But those decisions should be made based on the whole picture - including ethics - and not just because the LLM bros keep telling us that everyone who's not using their products will be at an disadvantage soon (which is obviously a marketing lie). -
(5/5) But at least we stood firm on our principles and managed to defend another aspect of our lives against being encroached on by slop machines.
On a more personal level, it really meant the world to me that my colleagues obviously weren’t opting for the „easy“ way, as everyone else did, but instead had made the ethical choice together with me. Not being alone in this situation really felt so good, and I realize how much I needed this tiny act of joint defiance right now.@r_alb Your characterization of (I presume) AI as "slop machines" makes it look like no useful work can be done with it. My experience tells me otherwise
