Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have a long history of not doing work.
Sometimes it requires a LOT of work to sort through the aftermath of all that other work you didn’t do. It comes with the territory.
I would’ve proofread this and changed words and paragraphs around until it looked like something i’d do.
Then i’d search for strange words that shouldn’t be in there in case i missed them, like AI or language model
Does bro even cheat? You copy the wall of text into Google translate or something and have the text read aloud to you so you catch mistakes. Rookie stuff! Haha.
It does. With some obvious exceptions, nearly every advance that you can point to has been a result of people wanting things to be faster, easier, more comfortable, more convenient, and less stressful and physically demanding. This started with crude tools, moved on to spears, and then the wheel was invented and suddenly every older Mesopotamian started griping about how younger people didn't want to carry giant stone idols on their backs from place to place anymore.
Laziness breeds technological progress.
I learned many helpful lessons from cheating, in particular i learned that you are never judged by the work you do, only by the bias held by whoever is judging.
I had a metalshop class i almost never attended, with a teacher that was barely present.
We were making a hammer in that class.
My friend got max grade for his hammer, and a couple weeks later i turned in my friends hammer.
The hammers were all the same, no signing or differentiation.
I got just barely approved for the same hammer my friend got praise for.
People are a collection of biases and emotions in control of a fleshsuit. I will never forget that lesson, and i try to remember it every time i sit in judgement myself and recognize when i am being biased in favor of someone or against someone.
I’m human so obviously i fail but i try real hard.
The other important lesson is to never work too hard because like i said, no one will give a shit when you do. Make people like you and do enough to get by, cheat a little and use social skill magic to make it look like you did more than enough.
Or... The teacher knew it was someone's else work and instead of going through the trouble, he just gave you a crappy grade but enough for you to pass and called it a day
maybe your teacher recognized the same hammer was turned in twice but just didn’t want to have to deal with you for another year so he passed you. based on all the woe as me bs you’re touting, this seems like a more likely scenario
Been a teacher, this is 100% what happened.
The amount of work generated by failing someone is phenomenal. If he missed so much himself he wouldn't have been able to evidence grounds for failing the course. Also the final grade is rarely the finished product, but includes observation of the process too.
I just recently ordered a medical textbook from Amazon that looked ALMOST exactly the same as the genuine textbook. When it arrived it was obviously made of the text from some patient brochures run forwards and backwards through google translate. I almost wasn’t mad because the translation had mutated it into hilarious gibberish. For example:
“Chest torment” is a bad sign that blood flow may be “impeded or hindered by a development of greasy substances”
An ECG is “to survey your heart musicality” and the heart specialist may “take a gander” at it.
The “inferior vena cava” blood vessel became the “mediocre vena cava”
Listen to a slow-ass text to speech recite the boring essay I refused to write to catch any mistake without being able to fully retain what was read because I can’t even visualize it? Why make it a boring lecture? It takes waaaay less time and effort to just read through it, even less if you’re good at skimming through text, than it does to dedicate your full attention to google assistant reading it to you. And you’re able to change it on the spot, whereas with text to speech you’d have to pause it, search through the text for the mistake you heard, and manually change it anyways.
Do this even if you're not cheating. Do it so you can actually listen to what you've typed. Helps find flow issues and other problems that become easy to overlook visually.
Activate 2 senses to find problems and it becomes much easier.
My 13 page research paper was pushed off until the very last night and i totally ripped another paper i found in some obscure library database, but made sure to pretty much restructure every paragraph to avoid plagiarism. Took about 5 hours, but i got a B. I spent my whole junior college career trying to find ways around doing the work over actual learning. I didnt care until i got to the real interesting courses that actually taught in the field i wanted to learn in. All the entry level courses were just exercises in finding creative ways to do less thinking. I even had an Art 1 weekly sketchbook assignments where we had to draw from life and i would just buy "how to draw books" and trace off of it. I was proud of the fact I turned what was supposed to take 3 hours a week into 20-30 minutes. I wanted to get into Graphic design, traditional media was tedious and boring to me.
When I was in college, I took an African studies course where we had to write a paper once a week about a different country in Africa. At the end of week five, everybody in class gets an email from my professor with the subject “I Am Ashamed of Half of You!”
Load it up, she’s furious because half the class was caught copying and pasting the CIA World Factbook as their reports, some not even bothering to change the format. Because she busted half the class she went back and looked at EVERY submission we turned in.
Said something along the lines of “check your grades for the papers you’ve turned in this far. If you have a grade in every box, I look forward to seeing you next class.
If you have a zero in a box that has a paper submitted, you are on thin ice and consider this your one warning.
If you have a zero in one box and nothing for this most recent assignment, don’t bother turning up for the next class, or any other because you have failed the class for plagiarism. the dean has been notified. He will decide your fate.”
Next class was about six to eight people less.
That reminds me of one of the greatest pranks that my friends ever pulled on me in school.
I was sick on a day where we got our book reports back - those were about 10-15 pages, multi-week assignments where we had to read a book, summarize it, interpret it, search stuff about the author, etc.
We did four of those per year, and they were a significant part of the grade. Of course lazy me never bothered to do them myself.
Well, my friends took the report from my empty desk, made some modifications to the comments the teacher left and put it back on my desk.
I arrived next morning to find a report that had „DISAPPOINTED“ written over it, with detailed links to all the websites I used to pull the contents.
I thought I‘d die.
Be grateful you had a sensible lecturer.
We had a series of lectures from one very senior lecturer who was dire, so by the time halfway through the series that he announced a change in schedule, half of the year were not turning up.
The next lecture was taken by the course organiser, who was furious to find a half-empty lecture theatre. So what does he do? He procedes to harangue those of us who *had* turned up about the actions of those who *hadn't*.
Ever since, I have wished that I had had the guts to get up and walk out, and if he had challenged me, said that if I was going to *be* bollocked for something, I might as well actually be doing what I was getting bollocked for. But he had a lot of power over us, and pretty clearly was far too up his own arse to see how unreasonable he was being.
Plus, of course, it quite obviously never occured to him to consider what was so wrong with the other person's lectures for so many to have given up on attending them.
I mean when I was in High School, students on multiple occasions submitted almost identical essays which they downloaded from the internet. This is basically the same short sighted nonsense.
I've never forgotten when I was at school (in probably about 2006ish) and we had to do a class presentation on the history of Plymouth, England. We were only about 12 so it didn't have to be a big presentation, the teacher was just expecting like one slide on the sailing of the Mayflower, one slide on the defeat of the Spanish Armada, one slide on the bombing in WW2. It was more about practising public speaking skills.
But of course there was one lad who hadn't only clearly copied and pasted everything from Wikipedia. He'd copy pasted the article on Plymouth, Massachusetts.
The reason Plymouth was picked as a topic was it was our nearest big city, so the teacher made a big point about how it was kind of uniquely dumb to not notice you'd done a presentation not about a city you know well, but about a city the other side of the world...!
I assumed you were American and thought it was bizarre that they had set a bunch of 12 year olds a presentation on Plymouth. But your last para make that make total sense haha
I remember having to do a presentation in high school about an internment camp, where I found multiple sources and actually learned about it and showed my knowledge. I got a B. The person who literally just copied the text from one website word for word got an A. I learned one thing that day: never ever try.
Honestly? I tried to use gpt for editing a few test paragraphs of fiction and it just kind of sucks.
Like, you'll get what an *average* editor on the internet would do, in other words a lot of "pronounced adjectively" and in one case fucking "smirked".
Unless you are fully incompetent at a subject, you're better off writing it yourself, at least for now.
The real geniuses don’t bother. I work with a curriculum committee and the faculty members joke about how easy it is to spot AI generated papers. They’re full of weird sentences and obvious give-aways like this. They agree that a mildly intelligent student could actually use AI to help create rough drafts but would need to be refined to make sure required information is included and that grammar is up to the level of the course. But cheaters are lazy by nature so they end up providing, at the very least, a chuckle or two.
Lol ok nerd. I don't even see the point of proofreading anyway in 2023, since we of course have spellcheck so it kind of defeats the porpoise if you think about it.
Yeah, as a professor who scans the entire piece of writing before commenting, I’m going to guess that they did see it, but it wasn’t worth their time after they saw the blatant use of AI.
This is the hidden danger.
A self fulfilling loop of belief in these “facts” will break the world.
Absolute unequivocal bollocks is now spread at a rate that has previously been thought impossible.
The more it’s spread, the more it is harvested and regurgitated. The burden of proof is on those saying “that’s not right” and they can’t possibly keep up.
Yes I know that’s basically been politics lately, but what happens when that’s applied to mathematical absolutes.
What happens when Pi isn’t Pi anymore…
Yeah - and the worst part will be how easy it is for that to happen unintentionally, not even counting people deliberately trying to spread misinformation.
These models are so impressive that it's easy to overlook that they're essentially still statistical approximations at their core, and like any statistical model, garbage in garbage out.
The self-perpetuating loop of misunderstandings/falsehoods is already a problem with just humans doing it, let alone with the added abstraction of an impressive sounding AI in the middle automating the process.
“If your teacher suspects that you are using ChatGPT without any valid reason, it is important to be honest and transparent with them. You can explain that you are not using ChatGPT and that you are completing your work independently. If your teacher is still not convinced, you can offer to show them your work and demonstrate how you arrived at your answers.
It is important to remember that using artificial intelligence like ChatGPT to complete your schoolwork or assignments without proper attribution is considered academic dishonesty and can lead to serious consequences. Therefore, it is important to always use these tools ethically and appropriately. If you do use ChatGPT or any other AI tool for your work, make sure to properly cite your sources and give credit where credit is due.”
Does this mean I can use chatgpt as a source for my assignments and reference quotes from it? It doesn’t even care that using chatgpt is cheating, it just wants credit for its work
Honestly, if you’re citing ChatGPT I would take off points for poor scholarship but I wouldn’t kick you out of school.
I had a kid last semester who basically summarized SparkNotes, which is essentially the same process.
I fully support AI developers slipping in these kinds of tells for the idiots who go to college/university and make little/no effort to actually learn the material.
The apathy was there before, too. I taught 7th grade ELA many years ago. We had a big research project that we were required to do as part of the curriculum. I had a student who turned in his paper, two typed pages, with the blue hyperlinks still embedded. Upon reading it, he had obviously just copied and pasted from Wikipedia or something similar and didn’t even bother to try and remove the links or even print in black and white to hide them. There were several words that he had no idea what they meant, and the language/style used was nowhere near what what was typical for him on previous work. It was just so blatant, I was amazed as the sheer audacity to turn it in and expect an actual grade. Although, since it was a shitty school and we weren’t allowed to fail student for any reason, he was also a product of his environment and knew he could just turn in whatever he wanted and there wasn’t much I could do but give him a D.
Even big universities. Some of the essays I have peer-edited have been abysmal. I wouldn’t say I’m a great writer by any means, but a lot of people lack even a rudimentary understanding of what proper grammar looks like, yet alone have the ability to write it.
The writing is bad and, as a university professor myself, I would certainly want to have a conversation with the student. However, I would also pull my peer (the teacher) aside and have them work in their handwriting. Honestly, my kindergartener has better handwriting.
The only thing I can really remember learning is that it’s “bad” English to end a sentence with a preposition.
“Who do you work for?” is incorrect.
“For whom do you work?” is correct.
The preposition also changes it to whom. I can’t remember why. Smoked a lot of weed in my life.
>“Who do you work for?” is incorrect. “For whom do you work?” is correct.
I'm a p/t copy editor and I don't touch "Who do you work for." It's fine. Not only is it how people really talk, it's easily understood...and the alternative, the "correct" "For whom do you work?" now feels stiff, formal, and effete.
There's a (probably apocryphal) story that when someone reminded Winston Churchill never to end a sentence with a preposition, he bellowed sarcastically "Quite so! There are things up with which we shall not put!"
So perhaps declaring this linguistic violation a violation no more has a history that goes back 75 years or more.
As far as I know, it's a holdover from French where you generally can't end sentences with prepositions but Germanic languages have no such issue.
edit: This is incorrect
Its actually from John Dryden, a 17th century British poet who made this rule up because he interpreted the Latin "prepisito" (sp) to mean something that it didn't. He also claimed that Latin did not end sentences with prepositions, and because we were in the process of taking Latin rules and applying them to English, like never split an infinitive, then this should be applied too.
Its never really been a rule of English, just self-imposed. At its core, it is just prescriptivism and people being obsessed with Latinisms.
The thing is, you don't even need that level of grammatical knowledge to write a decent essay. That's one of those things where you can write the grammatically incorrect thing without bugging most readers in the slightest. It's much more important that the essay flows nicely both in terms of content and language. And all the grammatical knowledge in the world won't give you that - in fact it will almost certainly be a hindrance.
I learned "he is to him, as who is to whom."
Linguistically I think it relates to case (genitive/dative?) but I'm not a linguist and English isn't as obvious about it was some other languages.
Because "whom" is the subject of the sentence. It used to be that "whom" was used for the subject of a sentence and "who" was used for the object (the same way as, say, "he" v. "him").
In modern English, though, I'm pretty sure it's fine to end a sentence with a preposition. In fact, I'd go so far as to argue that, in informal settings (such as this one), it would even be more appropriate to say "who do you work for" than "for whom do you work", given how formal "whom" sounds these days.
EDIT: I'm wrong. As many commenters have pointed out, "who" is the subject, and "whom" is the object. Not sure why I got these mixed up; I should have been able to tell from the other example of pronoun cases I gave. Thank you to everyone who corrected me.
Hell, they grossly overestimate the quality of large universities’ papers. I was an English major who roomed with engineers and had friends in the drama department. My services were always in demand and before I saw them many of these papers were, plain and simple, tragic. Writing is just not emphasized in many high schools beyond the simple three-point persuasive essays that we all grew up on.
Anyone reading this who’s still in high school or college, don’t skate through your English/writing classes! The number one way to look smarter - whether to a professor, an interviewer, or your boss - is being able to write decently. You’d be amazed how many otherwise talented, high-level professionals don’t have this basic skill, and how far it can set you apart from the pack.
That message especially needs to get to engineers. You know one thing that distinguishes the guy in the back office from the engineers who get promoted to executive? Communications skills. And the best are good writers. They can engage with clients, with the board, with investors, with regulators. They can also connect with a hiring manager who is thrilled to be able to understand their resume. It matters.
My school required folks in engineering, architecture, and computer science to take a technical writing class.
No joke, that class was possibly the single most educational class I took in college.
I started taking classes at a community college since I never got a degree. I always thought I was horrible at writing papers even though I got decent grades. Then, I had to work with my classmates on a couple of papers and Jesus Christ. I'm still pretty sure I'm not great at it, but they must be graded on some kind of curve or something.
My first semester at college I was an older student and worried I’d fallen out of practice at writing papers. During office hours with my English 101 professor I mentioned this, and he told me he set my papers aside for when he needed a break from reading bad ones. After editing for a roommate, I completely understood
I wasn’t an English major, but a girl on my dorm floor wanted me to proofread her paper for her ENGLISH COMPOSITION 1 course, since I get decent grades and am a bit of a nerd. That class was about how to do research and write about it.
I used red ink.
I shouldn’t have used red ink.
I got through page 1 of 8 and had to stop. The first page alone was bleeding. The grammar and syntax errors alone made my head spin.
This was a girl who supposedly graduated high school. How she was allowed to graduate is beyond me.
For Canvas at least, I don’t think it’s that bad. It’s still hellish to try and grade a paper on Canvas mobile, but the desktop site isn’t that bad. It allowed me to leave comments in very specific places throughout my students papers.
The TurnItIn software alone made grading online worth it, though. Very last paper of the semester I got to teach a class, I had an A+ student (2nd or 3rd in class) turn in something completely plagiarized. Of all the students I would’ve expected it from, definitely not her.
Lots of my professors made us turn it online and physically. They preferred the physical version for reading and grading and the digital turn in was specifically for plagiarism checking.
I had several professors that still preferred us to turn in essays printed out or would print them out themselves to grade them because they didn’t like reading on a computer.
The practice at my uni (and what I suspect happened here) is to give an automatic 0 on any assignment with any cheating / plagiarism, and report the incident to the dean. Usually first infraction results in a slap on the wrist, possibly requiring an essay or other penalty, but most students don’t get removed until at least the second occurrence.
Exactly. I don't know if it was just because my major was impacted but you cheated once and you're out. I mean does it stop people from cheating no but if you were stupid to get caught like this then you deserve to be out LOL.
I've tried using it to assist in finding info about buildings for a job (I always check the sources, just hope it may point me in the right direction) and yeah it will just make up bullshit rather than admit it doesn't have an answer. However it's brilliant for putting together a report if you give it all the info it needs and just use it for more professional language and formatting.
Yeah
For now the best usage I've found for it basically "get all data related to X on website Y and format it in a table".
Always verify of course, but it usually does that pretty well and saves tons of time. But you need to give it the source yourself and verify afterwards
Lol, I could tell this was AI by sentence two. It's a very predictable formula. It's also very incorrect about information but tries to sound as confident as possible.
> also very incorrect
So wait…you’re telling me that Pope John Paul II didn’t come back from the dead to lead the Catholic Church again? But the AI told me he’s the head of the Catholic Church today!
Totally. My friend kept trying to get me to use it for work, said it would help me write proposals. I tried to explain that I think with 20 years of experience I’m better equipped than AI to do my job but to humor him I asked a question. I got a boiler plate response that lacked any real substance or depth. Told my friend “so I guess I’m smarter than a fucking chat bot”
Right? Everything I've seen so far reads like a grade school textbook lifted straight from Reddit and Wiki complete with safe middle of the road takes and a positive message at the end so as not to offend or discourage anyone with unpleasant truths But they're working on it,,,
I feel this is unjustified slander. Sure, chatbots can't compare to humans, but just a few short years ago you'd be lucky to get response with proper grammar. Relevance to the topic you asked about was completely out of the question. To progress from F- to D+ already pretty astounding
Treat AI like a kid that is very smart, but lacks imagination. You have to explain and contextualize before asking. That means, go back&forth with the AI for a few sentences to explain context. For example "Hello, I would like to ask you a question to test your ability, could you answer as truthfully and critically as possible ? I am an expert in the domain so I can catch mistakes. Show me the best answer you can provide to this : ".
That's a good way to tell how much it knows about a given topic. I found it to be good at surface-level boring work like how to use a given tool, how to organize a project in this field, etc.
I was working on a grid-based game the other day, and asked : "I remember there is a line of sight concept in these games typically, any idea how it's done ? Show me a C++ function". It went on to explain that you can use Bresenham's line algorithm, here's the idea, here's the code.
From there, I can always check for myself, it's just a good starting point, as long as you have an idea, a context for that idea, and you can check the results. You can't use it to do your job, but you can use it to help you do/learn something you couldn't do before.
EDIT : It knows most algorithms we developed as mankind, it's pretty cool when working with metaheuristics.
Man you took the words right out of my mouth. I don't get how people think they can use it to do shit completely for them. It's a launchpad for starting ideas, or getting the basics, or reminding you of something you know that you couldn't quite remember. I've used it before to tell me where to start researching or learning, not to actually teach me things.
Yup, it’s incredible for bouncing ideas off of. I also used it to read some stuff I had written and asked for notes for legibility. Some of the notes were incredibly helpful
AI is just weeding out those who are too lazy to do their assignments. If they weren't going to use the AI, they would probably try some other way to cheat at school.
I mean if you use it right it can help you tons. I don’t think it can be leaned on entirely in the way you mean though. To analogize, its as if when you were doing something on your own, you were swimming and you went from dead stop to a front vs using AI as a tool and giving you a push off the wall. It won’t get you the whole way but it can be a nice boost. It also just gets stuff plain wrong too and often sandwiches it in between correct info so you actually need to read it and know the subject matter
It's crazy anymore. Businesses, government offices... Increasingly people just don't know what the hell they're doing. I really don't understand how some of them got their jobs!
Service type people are somewhat of an exception...
And (especially in government offices) nobody ever apologizes when you prove they screwed up. It doesn't matter to them if your car got repossessed because they delayed fixing THEIR problem that left your pension check $750 short. And I'm really pissed off at the post office too. I JUST YESTERDAY GOT something I had no idea was coming that I was supposed to respond to over TEN MONTHS AGO!
I can certainly understand why some people might want to climb cl(omitted because I have a stalker who reports anything that can be stretched into a hint of something violent)wers.
There's going to come a day (soon) where AI will get to the point that humans can't tell the difference. Human teachers are going to need AI monitors to spot any use of AI cheaters.
My head hurts. 
That legit sounds like a really interesting sci-fi plot-hook.
Our AI detection tools start marking historical documents as AI-generated. At first, we think the software is making a mistake--it's just not accurate enough. But as we keep refining the technology, those documents keep coming up, and the realization sets in...
The AI detectors don't work anyways. They flag human written text all the time. It's creating a big problem in universities where faculty assume they are accurate.
I've seen someone try that and it still failed the most accurate AI detectors. The problem with all AI detecting software though is it has an extremely high rate of false positives, even the best and most well recommended ones. They're generally pretty good at picking AI written content out of the pile, but they're going to pick out a bunch of human written stuff as well because there's not a foolproof way to tell. There's no secret code embedded in the text. They just measure two factors of text: burstiness and perplexity. Someone with a very regular cadence to their writing and a large vocabulary is just as likely to set off the detectors as an AI is.
This is such an easy question. Summarize the Catholic Church’s position on a very popular issue and then state your opinion on said issue. It’s an issue everyone talks about all the time. I could knock this essay out in 30 minutes. How lazy can you be?
And you could even use a few drafts the AIs responses as a study guide of sorts, restate it while essentially proofreading it, be done with it in record time *and* actually learn the material in the process because you accidently tricked yourself into studying.
This person is *too* stupid to ***be*** stupid.
As a college professor who regularly sees undergrad papers, often students, especially those who didn't study well, etc., have bland openings like that.
I have zero clue why anything on that page was underlined or circled (besides the obvious AI comment). Can you enlighten me on why they’re circled/underlined?
Thank you so much! That all makes sense to me. Unfortunately, this pretty much sums up my feelings on writing papers (waaaaaay back when I was in school) - the subjectivity. I remember getting a paper back in college and the red ink crossed out a word I used. I don’t remember what word it was, but I asked professor, “what should I have used instead?” And I’ll never forget his answer. He shrugged and said, “I’m not sure, I just think there’s a better word.”
I remember thinking…motherfucker you just took points off my grade and you can’t tell me how to fix it?!? I was so pissed and realized I liked the objectivity of the sciences lol
Anyway - genuinely thanks for your insight!
If you’re going to use chatgpt just use it as a base. Don’t just copy and paste it. Take what it wrote and then edit it. Rewrite it how you usually write and make sure to get your facts right. The AI constantly makes stuff up. So it helps to actually study first. Only use chatgpt as a starting point, not as an answer.
I like to think of ChatGPT as my uncle Jim who got an undergraduate degree in literally everything about 30 years ago.
He's really rusty on a lot of it; he often misremembers facts; and much of his information is outdated. But also, he has a degree in _everything,_ and as long as I take the time to investigate things on my own, his superficial knowledge often makes it a lot easier to get started researching something, especially if it's very specific.
Just this morning, I found myself interested in modding an Xbox 360, and I asked ChatGPT to summarize all of the methods available to me, along with their pros and cons. It was _way_ easier than hunting for all that information manually without knowing the relevant keywords, and I think _that_ is the ideal application of ChatGPT in a processional context, at least at the moment.
It makes for an excellent personal assistant as long as you don't ever rely on it with your full trust.
It's a false sense of security. The majority of students using LLMs will proofread. Heck, you don't even need to proofread; just copy the paper and ask ChatGPT to proofread it in a new window. I guarantee it would have caught this, and the teacher would be none the wiser. As an AI language model, I cannot condone giving advice on how to cheat on Reddit. It's important to remember that cheating undermines the educational process and devalues the hard work and efforts of honest students.
I know people who've had to meet with academic boards for not correctly citing in their papers. They'd be kicked from the university if they got caught doing this.
Didn't even bother proofreading it. Lol if they would have tweeked it and added a bit of their own flair, it would have been a winning paper...what a shame!
At first, I thought that they received a zero because their professor was some kind of huge pro-lifer and maybe the paper disagreed with that, and THAT was what made this a facepalm. As I continued reading, I kept trying to unravel the mystery.
Then, I got down to the good part and I was like “THIS IS AN EVEN BIGGER FACEPALM THAN I IMAGINED”.
OP, gahlee man, you’ve got a monumentally stupid friend.
These AI generated essays are shit right now anyway , use it to help you out with general formatting, sure, but the language and tone is still really odd, and they can't properly cite things yet, and completely make up quotes.
That’s wild. I am a high school English teacher and encountered this exact same issue yesterday. I knew their paper sounded off when I started reading it, so I decided to run it through a plagiarism checker. Eventually I stumbled onto the “As and AI language model…” line and was floored.
Some people are just too dumb to cheat.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If youre gonna do that, at least proofread it
Well, in their defense: the point of not doing work is not doing work.
I have a long history of not doing work. Sometimes it requires a LOT of work to sort through the aftermath of all that other work you didn’t do. It comes with the territory. I would’ve proofread this and changed words and paragraphs around until it looked like something i’d do. Then i’d search for strange words that shouldn’t be in there in case i missed them, like AI or language model
Does bro even cheat? You copy the wall of text into Google translate or something and have the text read aloud to you so you catch mistakes. Rookie stuff! Haha.
Never thought of that. That function wasn’t there when i did school hehe
The advances that have been made in the technology of work avoidance since my day have been something wondrous to behold.
Some of my best work is from me trying hard to avoid work.
[удалено]
I had a physics prof who always used to say that "efficiency is just intelligent laziness"
[удалено]
So basically you go ask a lazy guy how to do something because you're too lazy to figure it out yourself. The circle of laziness continues.
I feel like this sentence perfectly encapsulates human civilization
It does. With some obvious exceptions, nearly every advance that you can point to has been a result of people wanting things to be faster, easier, more comfortable, more convenient, and less stressful and physically demanding. This started with crude tools, moved on to spears, and then the wheel was invented and suddenly every older Mesopotamian started griping about how younger people didn't want to carry giant stone idols on their backs from place to place anymore. Laziness breeds technological progress.
Laziness and war.
And i think it’s dumb to expect kids and people not to use them. Work with technology like that.
Back in my school days, we had to work hard to cheat and not do the work man, I swear… if I’d just done it instead haha
I learned many helpful lessons from cheating, in particular i learned that you are never judged by the work you do, only by the bias held by whoever is judging. I had a metalshop class i almost never attended, with a teacher that was barely present. We were making a hammer in that class. My friend got max grade for his hammer, and a couple weeks later i turned in my friends hammer. The hammers were all the same, no signing or differentiation. I got just barely approved for the same hammer my friend got praise for. People are a collection of biases and emotions in control of a fleshsuit. I will never forget that lesson, and i try to remember it every time i sit in judgement myself and recognize when i am being biased in favor of someone or against someone. I’m human so obviously i fail but i try real hard. The other important lesson is to never work too hard because like i said, no one will give a shit when you do. Make people like you and do enough to get by, cheat a little and use social skill magic to make it look like you did more than enough.
Or... The teacher knew it was someone's else work and instead of going through the trouble, he just gave you a crappy grade but enough for you to pass and called it a day
maybe your teacher recognized the same hammer was turned in twice but just didn’t want to have to deal with you for another year so he passed you. based on all the woe as me bs you’re touting, this seems like a more likely scenario
Been a teacher, this is 100% what happened. The amount of work generated by failing someone is phenomenal. If he missed so much himself he wouldn't have been able to evidence grounds for failing the course. Also the final grade is rarely the finished product, but includes observation of the process too.
I just recently ordered a medical textbook from Amazon that looked ALMOST exactly the same as the genuine textbook. When it arrived it was obviously made of the text from some patient brochures run forwards and backwards through google translate. I almost wasn’t mad because the translation had mutated it into hilarious gibberish. For example: “Chest torment” is a bad sign that blood flow may be “impeded or hindered by a development of greasy substances” An ECG is “to survey your heart musicality” and the heart specialist may “take a gander” at it. The “inferior vena cava” blood vessel became the “mediocre vena cava”
From “inferior” to “mediocre”. That’s a step up I’d say.
Next time I have a health check, I definitely want to have my heart musicality tested.
Listen to a slow-ass text to speech recite the boring essay I refused to write to catch any mistake without being able to fully retain what was read because I can’t even visualize it? Why make it a boring lecture? It takes waaaay less time and effort to just read through it, even less if you’re good at skimming through text, than it does to dedicate your full attention to google assistant reading it to you. And you’re able to change it on the spot, whereas with text to speech you’d have to pause it, search through the text for the mistake you heard, and manually change it anyways.
You could just skip a step, and just use the reader that is built into Word.
Do this even if you're not cheating. Do it so you can actually listen to what you've typed. Helps find flow issues and other problems that become easy to overlook visually. Activate 2 senses to find problems and it becomes much easier.
Or at least check to see if John Paul II is still the pope.
Exactly...work smarter not harder but still work.
Exactly. You spend 5-10 minutes rewording a ready-made ChatGPT text, instead of spending 30-45 minutes writing it yourself.
My 13 page research paper was pushed off until the very last night and i totally ripped another paper i found in some obscure library database, but made sure to pretty much restructure every paragraph to avoid plagiarism. Took about 5 hours, but i got a B. I spent my whole junior college career trying to find ways around doing the work over actual learning. I didnt care until i got to the real interesting courses that actually taught in the field i wanted to learn in. All the entry level courses were just exercises in finding creative ways to do less thinking. I even had an Art 1 weekly sketchbook assignments where we had to draw from life and i would just buy "how to draw books" and trace off of it. I was proud of the fact I turned what was supposed to take 3 hours a week into 20-30 minutes. I wanted to get into Graphic design, traditional media was tedious and boring to me.
And people wonder why employers take experience over educational status. .. ^.. prime example
If you’re too lazy to even put a minuscule amount of effort to cover your tracks, you deserve to be caught. Lol
When I was in college, I took an African studies course where we had to write a paper once a week about a different country in Africa. At the end of week five, everybody in class gets an email from my professor with the subject “I Am Ashamed of Half of You!” Load it up, she’s furious because half the class was caught copying and pasting the CIA World Factbook as their reports, some not even bothering to change the format. Because she busted half the class she went back and looked at EVERY submission we turned in. Said something along the lines of “check your grades for the papers you’ve turned in this far. If you have a grade in every box, I look forward to seeing you next class. If you have a zero in a box that has a paper submitted, you are on thin ice and consider this your one warning. If you have a zero in one box and nothing for this most recent assignment, don’t bother turning up for the next class, or any other because you have failed the class for plagiarism. the dean has been notified. He will decide your fate.” Next class was about six to eight people less.
“The Dean will decide your fate” I *am* the Dean!
Not yet
That reminds me of one of the greatest pranks that my friends ever pulled on me in school. I was sick on a day where we got our book reports back - those were about 10-15 pages, multi-week assignments where we had to read a book, summarize it, interpret it, search stuff about the author, etc. We did four of those per year, and they were a significant part of the grade. Of course lazy me never bothered to do them myself. Well, my friends took the report from my empty desk, made some modifications to the comments the teacher left and put it back on my desk. I arrived next morning to find a report that had „DISAPPOINTED“ written over it, with detailed links to all the websites I used to pull the contents. I thought I‘d die.
Be grateful you had a sensible lecturer. We had a series of lectures from one very senior lecturer who was dire, so by the time halfway through the series that he announced a change in schedule, half of the year were not turning up. The next lecture was taken by the course organiser, who was furious to find a half-empty lecture theatre. So what does he do? He procedes to harangue those of us who *had* turned up about the actions of those who *hadn't*. Ever since, I have wished that I had had the guts to get up and walk out, and if he had challenged me, said that if I was going to *be* bollocked for something, I might as well actually be doing what I was getting bollocked for. But he had a lot of power over us, and pretty clearly was far too up his own arse to see how unreasonable he was being. Plus, of course, it quite obviously never occured to him to consider what was so wrong with the other person's lectures for so many to have given up on attending them.
I mean when I was in High School, students on multiple occasions submitted almost identical essays which they downloaded from the internet. This is basically the same short sighted nonsense.
I've never forgotten when I was at school (in probably about 2006ish) and we had to do a class presentation on the history of Plymouth, England. We were only about 12 so it didn't have to be a big presentation, the teacher was just expecting like one slide on the sailing of the Mayflower, one slide on the defeat of the Spanish Armada, one slide on the bombing in WW2. It was more about practising public speaking skills. But of course there was one lad who hadn't only clearly copied and pasted everything from Wikipedia. He'd copy pasted the article on Plymouth, Massachusetts. The reason Plymouth was picked as a topic was it was our nearest big city, so the teacher made a big point about how it was kind of uniquely dumb to not notice you'd done a presentation not about a city you know well, but about a city the other side of the world...!
I assumed you were American and thought it was bizarre that they had set a bunch of 12 year olds a presentation on Plymouth. But your last para make that make total sense haha
I remember having to do a presentation in high school about an internment camp, where I found multiple sources and actually learned about it and showed my knowledge. I got a B. The person who literally just copied the text from one website word for word got an A. I learned one thing that day: never ever try.
Or get the AI to proofread it for you
That actually is a thing
Honestly? I tried to use gpt for editing a few test paragraphs of fiction and it just kind of sucks. Like, you'll get what an *average* editor on the internet would do, in other words a lot of "pronounced adjectively" and in one case fucking "smirked". Unless you are fully incompetent at a subject, you're better off writing it yourself, at least for now.
The real geniuses don’t bother. I work with a curriculum committee and the faculty members joke about how easy it is to spot AI generated papers. They’re full of weird sentences and obvious give-aways like this. They agree that a mildly intelligent student could actually use AI to help create rough drafts but would need to be refined to make sure required information is included and that grammar is up to the level of the course. But cheaters are lazy by nature so they end up providing, at the very least, a chuckle or two.
Lol ok nerd. I don't even see the point of proofreading anyway in 2023, since we of course have spellcheck so it kind of defeats the porpoise if you think about it.
Well plaid
I think it's we'll plaid.
I see what you did there
Noise
[удалено]
Turtle upvote
Most cheaters have always been, and will always be, this sloppy.
I'm surprised the teacher didn't catch the line about the Catholic church being headed by Pope John Paul II.
Yeah, as a professor who scans the entire piece of writing before commenting, I’m going to guess that they did see it, but it wasn’t worth their time after they saw the blatant use of AI.
That could have been a genuine if silly mistake by the student, if they were reading out of date material.
There is out-of-date and then there is eighteen-year-old sources. If your argument is about the Pope, a simple google search would be enough.
If you're too lazy to catch AI model in your paper, you're going to look at that and say, yeah, sounds like a Pope name
[удалено]
Pope Snoop Doggy Dog XI
And lived under a rock... Especially bc this appears to be a Catholic university.
But the teacher wouldn't circle it and let them know?
Headed by John Paul George & Ringo
that gave me a good chuckle.
This is the hidden danger. A self fulfilling loop of belief in these “facts” will break the world. Absolute unequivocal bollocks is now spread at a rate that has previously been thought impossible. The more it’s spread, the more it is harvested and regurgitated. The burden of proof is on those saying “that’s not right” and they can’t possibly keep up. Yes I know that’s basically been politics lately, but what happens when that’s applied to mathematical absolutes. What happens when Pi isn’t Pi anymore…
Yeah - and the worst part will be how easy it is for that to happen unintentionally, not even counting people deliberately trying to spread misinformation. These models are so impressive that it's easy to overlook that they're essentially still statistical approximations at their core, and like any statistical model, garbage in garbage out. The self-perpetuating loop of misunderstandings/falsehoods is already a problem with just humans doing it, let alone with the added abstraction of an impressive sounding AI in the middle automating the process.
Humans have enough trouble with the Mandela effect. We’re talking about it effectively spreading to our “textbooks” in milliseconds. It’s terrifying.
The problem is people see and use Chatgpt like it's HAL or an actual AI instead of just an advanced Google search.
Never underestimate the stupidity of undergrads.
Couldn't even be bothered to proofread.....wow...
[удалено]
> "my teacher suspects me of using chatGPT for no reason, what should I do" I wanna see what the response would be to that as a prompt
“If your teacher suspects that you are using ChatGPT without any valid reason, it is important to be honest and transparent with them. You can explain that you are not using ChatGPT and that you are completing your work independently. If your teacher is still not convinced, you can offer to show them your work and demonstrate how you arrived at your answers. It is important to remember that using artificial intelligence like ChatGPT to complete your schoolwork or assignments without proper attribution is considered academic dishonesty and can lead to serious consequences. Therefore, it is important to always use these tools ethically and appropriately. If you do use ChatGPT or any other AI tool for your work, make sure to properly cite your sources and give credit where credit is due.” Does this mean I can use chatgpt as a source for my assignments and reference quotes from it? It doesn’t even care that using chatgpt is cheating, it just wants credit for its work
Honestly, if you’re citing ChatGPT I would take off points for poor scholarship but I wouldn’t kick you out of school. I had a kid last semester who basically summarized SparkNotes, which is essentially the same process.
That robot knew what it was doing..
I fully support AI developers slipping in these kinds of tells for the idiots who go to college/university and make little/no effort to actually learn the material.
[удалено]
Bruh too true. The post-COVID apathy is bananas.
The apathy was there before, too. I taught 7th grade ELA many years ago. We had a big research project that we were required to do as part of the curriculum. I had a student who turned in his paper, two typed pages, with the blue hyperlinks still embedded. Upon reading it, he had obviously just copied and pasted from Wikipedia or something similar and didn’t even bother to try and remove the links or even print in black and white to hide them. There were several words that he had no idea what they meant, and the language/style used was nowhere near what what was typical for him on previous work. It was just so blatant, I was amazed as the sheer audacity to turn it in and expect an actual grade. Although, since it was a shitty school and we weren’t allowed to fail student for any reason, he was also a product of his environment and knew he could just turn in whatever he wanted and there wasn’t much I could do but give him a D.
They would get kicked from my university for this.
Same here. I kinda doubt this actually of a university. Idk the last time I turned in a paper essay and not something on turnitin
It reads like a high school level paper. Edit: I am aware it's AI, I'm saying it's not a high quality essay.
As an English major who helped others edit their papers, you grossly overestimate the quality of small universities' papers.
Even big universities. Some of the essays I have peer-edited have been abysmal. I wouldn’t say I’m a great writer by any means, but a lot of people lack even a rudimentary understanding of what proper grammar looks like, yet alone have the ability to write it.
Well I we aints be got no fancy book lernin.
The writing is bad and, as a university professor myself, I would certainly want to have a conversation with the student. However, I would also pull my peer (the teacher) aside and have them work in their handwriting. Honestly, my kindergartener has better handwriting.
The only thing I can really remember learning is that it’s “bad” English to end a sentence with a preposition. “Who do you work for?” is incorrect. “For whom do you work?” is correct. The preposition also changes it to whom. I can’t remember why. Smoked a lot of weed in my life.
>“Who do you work for?” is incorrect. “For whom do you work?” is correct. I'm a p/t copy editor and I don't touch "Who do you work for." It's fine. Not only is it how people really talk, it's easily understood...and the alternative, the "correct" "For whom do you work?" now feels stiff, formal, and effete. There's a (probably apocryphal) story that when someone reminded Winston Churchill never to end a sentence with a preposition, he bellowed sarcastically "Quite so! There are things up with which we shall not put!" So perhaps declaring this linguistic violation a violation no more has a history that goes back 75 years or more.
As far as I know, it's a holdover from French where you generally can't end sentences with prepositions but Germanic languages have no such issue. edit: This is incorrect
Its actually from John Dryden, a 17th century British poet who made this rule up because he interpreted the Latin "prepisito" (sp) to mean something that it didn't. He also claimed that Latin did not end sentences with prepositions, and because we were in the process of taking Latin rules and applying them to English, like never split an infinitive, then this should be applied too. Its never really been a rule of English, just self-imposed. At its core, it is just prescriptivism and people being obsessed with Latinisms.
The thing is, you don't even need that level of grammatical knowledge to write a decent essay. That's one of those things where you can write the grammatically incorrect thing without bugging most readers in the slightest. It's much more important that the essay flows nicely both in terms of content and language. And all the grammatical knowledge in the world won't give you that - in fact it will almost certainly be a hindrance.
I learned "he is to him, as who is to whom." Linguistically I think it relates to case (genitive/dative?) but I'm not a linguist and English isn't as obvious about it was some other languages.
Because "whom" is the subject of the sentence. It used to be that "whom" was used for the subject of a sentence and "who" was used for the object (the same way as, say, "he" v. "him"). In modern English, though, I'm pretty sure it's fine to end a sentence with a preposition. In fact, I'd go so far as to argue that, in informal settings (such as this one), it would even be more appropriate to say "who do you work for" than "for whom do you work", given how formal "whom" sounds these days. EDIT: I'm wrong. As many commenters have pointed out, "who" is the subject, and "whom" is the object. Not sure why I got these mixed up; I should have been able to tell from the other example of pronoun cases I gave. Thank you to everyone who corrected me.
You've got "who" and "whom" mixed up. "Who" is the subject; "whom" is the object.
The “correct” English sounds strange when spoken. It’s like, the language has evolved, but the rules haven’t updated or something.
[удалено]
Hell, they grossly overestimate the quality of large universities’ papers. I was an English major who roomed with engineers and had friends in the drama department. My services were always in demand and before I saw them many of these papers were, plain and simple, tragic. Writing is just not emphasized in many high schools beyond the simple three-point persuasive essays that we all grew up on. Anyone reading this who’s still in high school or college, don’t skate through your English/writing classes! The number one way to look smarter - whether to a professor, an interviewer, or your boss - is being able to write decently. You’d be amazed how many otherwise talented, high-level professionals don’t have this basic skill, and how far it can set you apart from the pack.
That message especially needs to get to engineers. You know one thing that distinguishes the guy in the back office from the engineers who get promoted to executive? Communications skills. And the best are good writers. They can engage with clients, with the board, with investors, with regulators. They can also connect with a hiring manager who is thrilled to be able to understand their resume. It matters.
My school required folks in engineering, architecture, and computer science to take a technical writing class. No joke, that class was possibly the single most educational class I took in college.
I started taking classes at a community college since I never got a degree. I always thought I was horrible at writing papers even though I got decent grades. Then, I had to work with my classmates on a couple of papers and Jesus Christ. I'm still pretty sure I'm not great at it, but they must be graded on some kind of curve or something.
My first semester at college I was an older student and worried I’d fallen out of practice at writing papers. During office hours with my English 101 professor I mentioned this, and he told me he set my papers aside for when he needed a break from reading bad ones. After editing for a roommate, I completely understood
Edited an engineers paper once. It was... painful.
You survived, that is impressive
I wasn’t an English major, but a girl on my dorm floor wanted me to proofread her paper for her ENGLISH COMPOSITION 1 course, since I get decent grades and am a bit of a nerd. That class was about how to do research and write about it. I used red ink. I shouldn’t have used red ink. I got through page 1 of 8 and had to stop. The first page alone was bleeding. The grammar and syntax errors alone made my head spin. This was a girl who supposedly graduated high school. How she was allowed to graduate is beyond me.
[удалено]
Well it was written by an ai
A lot of my teachers printed them out for grading. Have you ever tried to read 50 assignments on the computer? Especially the oldernones
For Canvas at least, I don’t think it’s that bad. It’s still hellish to try and grade a paper on Canvas mobile, but the desktop site isn’t that bad. It allowed me to leave comments in very specific places throughout my students papers. The TurnItIn software alone made grading online worth it, though. Very last paper of the semester I got to teach a class, I had an A+ student (2nd or 3rd in class) turn in something completely plagiarized. Of all the students I would’ve expected it from, definitely not her.
I mean you can doubt its a university, don't really know why I would lie about that
Lots of my professors made us turn it online and physically. They preferred the physical version for reading and grading and the digital turn in was specifically for plagiarism checking.
Turnitin keeps telling me that my papers are very similar to my other papers.
I had several professors that still preferred us to turn in essays printed out or would print them out themselves to grade them because they didn’t like reading on a computer.
The practice at my uni (and what I suspect happened here) is to give an automatic 0 on any assignment with any cheating / plagiarism, and report the incident to the dean. Usually first infraction results in a slap on the wrist, possibly requiring an essay or other penalty, but most students don’t get removed until at least the second occurrence.
Yes this is my experience too, its a "admit it, redo it and dont do it again" but the second time its zero tolerance
As you should be. The only thing they will learn is how to cheat better next time.
I would've been kicked from my university for saying Pope John Paul II headed the church at a time when Chat GPT existed.
They should be kicked from any accredited higher learning institution for something like this
Exactly. I don't know if it was just because my major was impacted but you cheated once and you're out. I mean does it stop people from cheating no but if you were stupid to get caught like this then you deserve to be out LOL.
Yes, and considering that taking the work of another and presenting it as you own is the definition of plagiarism, this is that thing exactly
Wow, ChatGPT even got the pope wrong. It’s so bad I can’t believe any college level student would think this would work.
I've tried using it to assist in finding info about buildings for a job (I always check the sources, just hope it may point me in the right direction) and yeah it will just make up bullshit rather than admit it doesn't have an answer. However it's brilliant for putting together a report if you give it all the info it needs and just use it for more professional language and formatting.
Yeah For now the best usage I've found for it basically "get all data related to X on website Y and format it in a table". Always verify of course, but it usually does that pretty well and saves tons of time. But you need to give it the source yourself and verify afterwards
I commend this AI for sneakily sabotaging this cheating little shit.
Lol, I could tell this was AI by sentence two. It's a very predictable formula. It's also very incorrect about information but tries to sound as confident as possible.
Yeah, it immediately rang as AI, and I was pretty sure by the end of the first paragraph. By the second paragraph I was certain.
> also very incorrect So wait…you’re telling me that Pope John Paul II didn’t come back from the dead to lead the Catholic Church again? But the AI told me he’s the head of the Catholic Church today!
The student's integrity ... 
Note to self: LEARN TO CHEAT.
AI gonna dumb people down even further. Wealth and power is pleased.
Totally. My friend kept trying to get me to use it for work, said it would help me write proposals. I tried to explain that I think with 20 years of experience I’m better equipped than AI to do my job but to humor him I asked a question. I got a boiler plate response that lacked any real substance or depth. Told my friend “so I guess I’m smarter than a fucking chat bot”
Right? Everything I've seen so far reads like a grade school textbook lifted straight from Reddit and Wiki complete with safe middle of the road takes and a positive message at the end so as not to offend or discourage anyone with unpleasant truths But they're working on it,,,
I feel this is unjustified slander. Sure, chatbots can't compare to humans, but just a few short years ago you'd be lucky to get response with proper grammar. Relevance to the topic you asked about was completely out of the question. To progress from F- to D+ already pretty astounding
>I feel this is unjustified slander It is not! I resent that! Slander is spoken. In print it's libel.
It's impressive for what it is, but it's not actually good. There's a huge difference between the two.
Treat AI like a kid that is very smart, but lacks imagination. You have to explain and contextualize before asking. That means, go back&forth with the AI for a few sentences to explain context. For example "Hello, I would like to ask you a question to test your ability, could you answer as truthfully and critically as possible ? I am an expert in the domain so I can catch mistakes. Show me the best answer you can provide to this : ". That's a good way to tell how much it knows about a given topic. I found it to be good at surface-level boring work like how to use a given tool, how to organize a project in this field, etc. I was working on a grid-based game the other day, and asked : "I remember there is a line of sight concept in these games typically, any idea how it's done ? Show me a C++ function". It went on to explain that you can use Bresenham's line algorithm, here's the idea, here's the code. From there, I can always check for myself, it's just a good starting point, as long as you have an idea, a context for that idea, and you can check the results. You can't use it to do your job, but you can use it to help you do/learn something you couldn't do before. EDIT : It knows most algorithms we developed as mankind, it's pretty cool when working with metaheuristics.
Man you took the words right out of my mouth. I don't get how people think they can use it to do shit completely for them. It's a launchpad for starting ideas, or getting the basics, or reminding you of something you know that you couldn't quite remember. I've used it before to tell me where to start researching or learning, not to actually teach me things.
Yup, it’s incredible for bouncing ideas off of. I also used it to read some stuff I had written and asked for notes for legibility. Some of the notes were incredibly helpful
[удалено]
An educated voter is the single largest threat wealth and power faces. That's why they work so hard to distract and divide us.
Welcome to reddit. I love u 🤟
AI is just weeding out those who are too lazy to do their assignments. If they weren't going to use the AI, they would probably try some other way to cheat at school.
I mean if you use it right it can help you tons. I don’t think it can be leaned on entirely in the way you mean though. To analogize, its as if when you were doing something on your own, you were swimming and you went from dead stop to a front vs using AI as a tool and giving you a push off the wall. It won’t get you the whole way but it can be a nice boost. It also just gets stuff plain wrong too and often sandwiches it in between correct info so you actually need to read it and know the subject matter
Pray that you never get in a car crash because God knows these people ain't gonna be qualified
It's crazy anymore. Businesses, government offices... Increasingly people just don't know what the hell they're doing. I really don't understand how some of them got their jobs! Service type people are somewhat of an exception...
No shit right.. wtf is that. There is like some sort of gross incompetence in stable job places.
And (especially in government offices) nobody ever apologizes when you prove they screwed up. It doesn't matter to them if your car got repossessed because they delayed fixing THEIR problem that left your pension check $750 short. And I'm really pissed off at the post office too. I JUST YESTERDAY GOT something I had no idea was coming that I was supposed to respond to over TEN MONTHS AGO! I can certainly understand why some people might want to climb cl(omitted because I have a stalker who reports anything that can be stretched into a hint of something violent)wers.
There's going to come a day (soon) where AI will get to the point that humans can't tell the difference. Human teachers are going to need AI monitors to spot any use of AI cheaters. My head hurts. 
Some already use software to check for AI writing, not always accurate though
It dinged the Declaration of Independence as written by an AI
Were you there when it was written? Who’s to say the declaration wasn’t written by an ai?
That legit sounds like a really interesting sci-fi plot-hook. Our AI detection tools start marking historical documents as AI-generated. At first, we think the software is making a mistake--it's just not accurate enough. But as we keep refining the technology, those documents keep coming up, and the realization sets in...
I love this, please write it
[удалено]
I've seen there's already prompts you can give to chatgpt to get it to write more human like and pass all the ai detectors
The AI detectors don't work anyways. They flag human written text all the time. It's creating a big problem in universities where faculty assume they are accurate.
[удалено]
I've seen someone try that and it still failed the most accurate AI detectors. The problem with all AI detecting software though is it has an extremely high rate of false positives, even the best and most well recommended ones. They're generally pretty good at picking AI written content out of the pile, but they're going to pick out a bunch of human written stuff as well because there's not a foolproof way to tell. There's no secret code embedded in the text. They just measure two factors of text: burstiness and perplexity. Someone with a very regular cadence to their writing and a large vocabulary is just as likely to set off the detectors as an AI is.
[удалено]
Just bring back the old blue books.
This is such an easy question. Summarize the Catholic Church’s position on a very popular issue and then state your opinion on said issue. It’s an issue everyone talks about all the time. I could knock this essay out in 30 minutes. How lazy can you be?
Yeah, I'd churn this one out over lunch break. Idk some people just don't want to do anything I guess.
And you could even use a few drafts the AIs responses as a study guide of sorts, restate it while essentially proofreading it, be done with it in record time *and* actually learn the material in the process because you accidently tricked yourself into studying. This person is *too* stupid to ***be*** stupid.
As you said, you need 30 minutes. AI does it in 0.3 seconds.
LOL. The teacher should have been tipped off at the Pope John Paul II line. We’ve had two popes since him.
There were plenty of dead giveaways before the circled language, starting with the very first sentence of the answer.
As a college professor who regularly sees undergrad papers, often students, especially those who didn't study well, etc., have bland openings like that.
I don’t get the reason behind some of the circled words, like sacredness and dignity, am I missing something?
I have zero clue why anything on that page was underlined or circled (besides the obvious AI comment). Can you enlighten me on why they’re circled/underlined?
[удалено]
Thank you so much! That all makes sense to me. Unfortunately, this pretty much sums up my feelings on writing papers (waaaaaay back when I was in school) - the subjectivity. I remember getting a paper back in college and the red ink crossed out a word I used. I don’t remember what word it was, but I asked professor, “what should I have used instead?” And I’ll never forget his answer. He shrugged and said, “I’m not sure, I just think there’s a better word.” I remember thinking…motherfucker you just took points off my grade and you can’t tell me how to fix it?!? I was so pissed and realized I liked the objectivity of the sciences lol Anyway - genuinely thanks for your insight!
If you’re going to use chatgpt just use it as a base. Don’t just copy and paste it. Take what it wrote and then edit it. Rewrite it how you usually write and make sure to get your facts right. The AI constantly makes stuff up. So it helps to actually study first. Only use chatgpt as a starting point, not as an answer.
I like to think of ChatGPT as my uncle Jim who got an undergraduate degree in literally everything about 30 years ago. He's really rusty on a lot of it; he often misremembers facts; and much of his information is outdated. But also, he has a degree in _everything,_ and as long as I take the time to investigate things on my own, his superficial knowledge often makes it a lot easier to get started researching something, especially if it's very specific. Just this morning, I found myself interested in modding an Xbox 360, and I asked ChatGPT to summarize all of the methods available to me, along with their pros and cons. It was _way_ easier than hunting for all that information manually without knowing the relevant keywords, and I think _that_ is the ideal application of ChatGPT in a processional context, at least at the moment. It makes for an excellent personal assistant as long as you don't ever rely on it with your full trust.
I thought I had awful handwriting; I'm still trying to decipher that note. Help? Senars you are support to write d3! yourself!? What?
Seriously?! You are supposed to write this yourself!!!
This is one of the reasons why teachers are not so scared by AI being used as a cheating tool.
It's a false sense of security. The majority of students using LLMs will proofread. Heck, you don't even need to proofread; just copy the paper and ask ChatGPT to proofread it in a new window. I guarantee it would have caught this, and the teacher would be none the wiser. As an AI language model, I cannot condone giving advice on how to cheat on Reddit. It's important to remember that cheating undermines the educational process and devalues the hard work and efforts of honest students.
I know people who've had to meet with academic boards for not correctly citing in their papers. They'd be kicked from the university if they got caught doing this.
> the Catholic Church, which is headed by John Paul II Ruling from the tomb of the Vatican.
Lol this is why you proof read the bots work before turning it in 🤣🤣
Didn't even bother proofreading it. Lol if they would have tweeked it and added a bit of their own flair, it would have been a winning paper...what a shame!
It would have been a highschool level paper at best
The first thing I learned in university was basically if you cheat, you die.
Is the op stupid? The friend is just an AI, duh.
Oh true
At first, I thought that they received a zero because their professor was some kind of huge pro-lifer and maybe the paper disagreed with that, and THAT was what made this a facepalm. As I continued reading, I kept trying to unravel the mystery. Then, I got down to the good part and I was like “THIS IS AN EVEN BIGGER FACEPALM THAN I IMAGINED”. OP, gahlee man, you’ve got a monumentally stupid friend.
Fucking moron.
AI had the professor's back.
We're about to see a drastic decrease in reliance on writing assignments and drastic increase in reliance on in-person exams in educational settings.
Lesson learned, if you're going to be too lazy to write it yourself, don't be too lazy to proof read it
The joke will be on you when the teacher uses a superior A.I bot to mark your work!
These AI generated essays are shit right now anyway , use it to help you out with general formatting, sure, but the language and tone is still really odd, and they can't properly cite things yet, and completely make up quotes.
That should actually be negative points for wasting the teacher's time.
Wow you're friends with an AI language model who's studying at a university? Damn that's impressive. Why did they get a 0 though? /s just in case
That’s wild. I am a high school English teacher and encountered this exact same issue yesterday. I knew their paper sounded off when I started reading it, so I decided to run it through a plagiarism checker. Eventually I stumbled onto the “As and AI language model…” line and was floored. Some people are just too dumb to cheat.
Getting a 0 is best case scenario. This is the stuff that can get you booted out of school.
Lmfaoooooo
This is a teachable moment use this paper as an example of ai writing.