Unless the school used one of those ai detection services that are known for giving false positives, I'll side with the school.
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
343 points (97.5% liked)
Fuck AI
1291 readers
598 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
God, I wish my parents sued my school over being misdiagnosed.
High-tech fancy plagiarism is still plagiarism.
Article doesn't say if he used AI to wholesale write his paper, which obviously is cheating, or if he used it as a resource like Google. Some details would be nice here.
hahaha enjoy yours and the schools legal bills, parents.
I would be so pissed if I lived / paid taxes in that school's district and my tax dollars had to pay those legal bills. Would consider suing those parents myself.
Way to Streisand Effect the incident for potential universities.
"Our kid will cheat and we'll sue you for calling him out" looks great on a college application.
America and suing for random bullshit, name a more iconic duo
Bad parenting. Not only did they not talk to their kid about what constitutes honourable academic conduct, not only did they not talk to their kid about the pitfalls of using generative AI, especially in an academic context, they are now teaching their brat that the proper response to fucking up is to blame the rules, to blame the school, to blame other people. Bad parents.
I wonder, have these people no shame?
Having worked with parents like this before: No. None at all. They'd rather throw thousands of dollars at different attorneys hoping one of them will take the case to teach their children to never have shame.
Looks like the handbook does explicitly mention it:
Academic Integrity: Cheating and Plagiarism To cheat is to act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. In an academic setting, cheating consists of such acts as communicating with other student(s) by talking or writing during a test or quiz; unauthorized use of technology, including Artificial Intelligence (AI), during an assessment; or any other such action that invalidates the result of the assessment or other assignment. Plagiarism consists of the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author, including Artificial Intelligence, and the representation of such as one’s own work. Plagiarism and cheating in any form are considered disciplinary matters to be addressed by the school. A teacher apprehending one or more students cheating on any graded assignment, quiz or test will record a failing grade for that assignment for each student involved. The teacher will inform the parent(s) of the incident and assistant principal who will add the information to the student’s disciplinary file. The assistant principal may take further action if they deem it warranted. See Code of Discipline.
Did he cite the LLM properly?
They want this kid to get into Stanford?? 🤣🤣🤣
Liar, cheater, and lawsuit wielder? Perfect Ivy League material. Thats how political and managerial elites are made from.
He cheats from young. Great ivy shit material. Maybe if he rapes somebody he’ll get to be a supreme court justice.
connections over merit
What fucking snowflakes. When I was a kid, if you had someone write your paper for you, you got a 0 for the assignment. When you go to college, they'll fail you out of the course for that shit (because its cheating).
The only ones harming this kid's future is the parents trying to coddle their kid and protect them from the (rather light) consequences of their actions.
I taught in Chinese universities for 16 years. Initially I liked it. The students were hard-working and respectful. Parents listened to teacher advice. If kids were caught cheating there was Hell to pay ... from the parents, not just the school.
Over that 16 year period, though, everything changed. Parents started showing up to middle schools whose response to any misconduct was to privately donate red portraits of Chairman Mao to the school administrators and suddenly all records of misconduct went missing. Marks were "reassessed". Leading to universities being flooded by the worst imaginable students who'd never had a negative effect to any shenanigans their entire lives.
Only universities are a different world entirely. It takes a whole lot more red portraits of Chairman Mao to get misconduct erased in university. Way more such portraits than all but the top 0.1% could pay. So these poor kids, having slid by for 12 years of no consequences suddenly get hit square between the eyes with consequences that for the first time in their lives Daddy couldn't erase by waving said red portraits around.
Yes, they were little shits. Yes, I hated them as students. But I still felt bad for them as people because they were made monsters. They weren't born monsters.
Still didn't stop me from quitting teaching, though.
It's funny how this reads like a typical "China bad" comment but goes on to show how economic inequality ruins society.
Not doubting or criticising you at all, just observing that "communist China" has very capitalist problems. If only they were more communist
As someone working adjacent to highschools in the West, there's not a single difference in my experience to theirs. It's not an issue of their economic system, it's an issue of people around the entire world. Seems like entitlement has never been higher amongst parents.
There’s a lot of criticism of Chinese capitalist tendencies from the left. Yeah they do some things with communist values and everything but Dengism runs deep. The fact is that in the people’s republic of China the workers lack the power to exert their will on the means of production and the wealthy have the ability to exert outsized power over society and those around them.
China is not communist. It has never claimed to be communist. (Nor had the USSR made such a claim.)
"Communist" countries are, properly termed, "socialist" states because in Marxist theory (grossly simplified) the development is Capitalist->Socialist->Communist. In a socialist state the Communist Party is intended to shepherd people along the path to communism. Once communism is achieved, there is no need for a government. As such, the very term "communist government" is an oxymoron.
So China is a "socialist state". And socialist states, in communist theory, are not about "free medical care" or whatnot, like the "social democracies" of the west (like, say, Sweden) are about. Socialism, in Marxist terminology, is a very specific thing that has nothing to do with free state services (though those may be a desirable byproduct of them). And, get this, socialist states may use capitalist tools to accomplish their ends. It's just that capitalism in a socialist state is a tool used by the state, and is also under its thumb (which is why billionaires in China fear government; government in the USA, by contrast, fears billionaires).
That being said, yes, there's huge swaths of inequality in China, and education in particular is currently being massacred by it. The government attacks inequality fitfully here and there, but there does need to be a more concerted and forceful effort for it to actually work.
(Of course, with my more anarchistic leanings, I'm pretty certain that the socialist phase is a regressive concept that will never end because the people who run socialist governments really like this feeling of being in power so won't be giving it up anytime soon.)
Just to add on to this that IIRC while Marx believed that the transition from socialism to communism would happen, the idea of a communist party guiding the people on the way is essentially the crux of Leninism.
The best parts of Actually Existing Socialism are commodity production and a centralized state!
He didn't do the assignment. Those parents can get bent.
But I heard the kid was responsible for writing all the material the AI was trained on!
/s
What would the parents' stance be if he'd asked someone else to write his assignment for him?
Same thing.
Dale and Jennifer Harris allege that the Hingham High School student handbook did not explicitly prohibit the use of AI to complete assignments
I'll bet you the student handbook doesn't explicitly prohibit taking a shit on his desk, but he'd sure as Hell be disciplined for doing it. This whole YOU DIDN'T EXPLICITLY PROHIBIT THIS SO IT'S FINE!!!111oneoneeleventy! thing that a certain class of people have is, to my mind, a clear sign of sociopathy.
Someone in the comments claims to have found the school handbook, and it does explicitly say misuse of AI is forbidden
load more comments
(12 replies)
"a grade of 65 out of 100 on the assignment—has harmed his chances of getting into Stanford University and other elite schools."
No, using AI tools harmed his chances...
Yeah, I can’t really understand why anyone would think that you wouldn’t fail for this. You’re being tested on your ability to do something and having a machine do it for you. At most generous to AI it’s like bringing calculators to an arithmetic class.
Bringing a calculator to math class still requires you to know which formula to use and when. It's not the same as asking an AI to do it all.
Ehh, the AI did its job as a tool.
The kid harmed his chances by being a tool.
The way I see AI as a tool in a classroom or learning setting is that you should be punished if you willingly used it due to laziness, not understanding the course work, or I assume most likely both. On its own it's not terrible (environment aside), but it's certainly not something I'd accept if I were a teacher grading homework.
OK, the parents are suing. And the district already filed a motion to dismiss.
Please understand, the world isn't a nuts as the headlines tell us. Judges toss frivolous lawsuits all day long. We only hear about the nut cases because they're nut cases. Money says this case is never heard.
It's honestly more impressive that the family even found lawyers to take the case. As someone who's been dealing with a frightfully similar situation at work, entitled parents trying to use a lawsuit to "correct" a clear student error, we've had 4-5 different law firms reach out to us for details about the case, and every time they thank us for our time and refuse to pursue the case further because it's clear the kid was in error.
Money says this case is never heard
Considering how many kids get into Ivy League schools purely because of who their parents are and/or home much money they donate, you’re most certainly right
load more comments
(1 replies)
They didn't even give him the 0 he deserved?
Right? He didn't earn the knowledge for himself (which is the whole point of school) so he was lucky, IMO, to even get that undeserved 65.
load more comments
(8 replies)
view more: next ›