Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 30 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: Cost and time-saving makes me straight up guffaw knowing how much money and labor goes into some of this stuff and how long it can take to see any real results (only for the AI to fall right back into its terrible behavior patterns shortly after making progress). Humanities you said? It's going to take so much work to get an AI up to speed on those topics. I saw one yesterday spit out the most horribly offensive slop in response to a simple request to help set up a harmless dad joke, LOL. Academic Twitter, or at least my little corner of it, has been full of discussion about the intrusion of AI into published STEM research. This is a screenshot from an actual article published by (of course) Elsevier: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 3 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Academic Twitter, or at least my little corner of it, has been full of discussion about the intrusion of AI into published STEM research. This is a screenshot from an actual article published by (of course) Elsevier: Very bilious. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Nagy Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 47 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said: But, unlike much of Europe (at least based on what I hear), the vast majority of people are not in walking distance to a store and between kids & jobs, many can still only get to the store once a week. It all depends where you live in Europe too. In cities a lot of people have supermarkets close by (not always in walking distance). I'm a lucky guy. I have a bakery, a full service grocery and a discounter (Aldi) at the other side of the street. Almost every grocery store in NL has a nice selection of fresh fruit, vegetables and meat. Most even have freshly baked bread (baked in the store). But small villages is a totally different story. Mom and pop stores at best, sometimes not even that. Peeve: A new trend is that grocery stores move out of certain neighborhoods here as well. Edited March 15 by Sid Nagy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayashe Ninetails Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 4 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Academic Twitter, or at least my little corner of it, has been full of discussion about the intrusion of AI into published STEM research. This is a screenshot from an actual article published by (of course) Elsevier: No way. Do they not edit those articles, orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Peeve: Man, this is worse than I thought. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 5 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: Do they not edit those articles, orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... The Editor is an AI.. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Nagy Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 8 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: No way. Do they not edit those articles, orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Peeve: Man, this is worse than I thought. 3 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiffy Voxel Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Peeve: Evri (the courier delivery firm formerly known as Hermes) apparently don't bother letting you know when they're going to call to collect a package. Good thing I was in when they did ring the doorbell. Related Peeve: the tracking page on their website is even more useless than it was the last time I used their services. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 10 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: No way. Do they not edit those articles, orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Peeve: Man, this is worse than I thought. Well, this is Elsevier which, despite being one of the largest and most important academic publishers in the world (they own Lancet, which is the premier medical journal in the world), is also notorious for . . . dumb and highly questionable doings. They're unethical as hell, and got caught a few decades back "publishing" fake medical journals in order to boost their metrics. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 8 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Well, this is Elsevier which, despite being one of the largest and most important academic publishers in the world (they own Lancet, which is the premier medical journal in the world), is also notorious for . . . dumb and highly questionable doings. They're unethical as hell, and got caught a few decades back "publishing" fake medical journals in order to boost their metrics. Aren't publishers and journals often guilty of being more interested in publishing for $$ than ethics? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Nagy Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 3 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: Aren't publishers and journals often guilty of being more interested in publishing for $$ than ethics? Yes, but one doesn't expect such a behavior from quality papers, magazines and publishers. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said: Aren't publishers and journals often guilty of being more interested in publishing for $$ than ethics? Journals, or at least the good ones, are edited and managed by academics who receive no financial compensation for their work, in exactly the same way that academics aren't paid for the scholarly articles they submit for publication. Publishing academic work is simply part of most academics' job description. A great many journals publish at a loss, and are kept afloat only through grant money or institutional support. It's a really precarious existence, sometimes. But increasingly over the past 30 or more years the old model has been challenged by huge publishing conglomerates, such as Elsevier, Springer, Taylor & Francis, etc., that DO work on a for-profit model, and are quite happy not merely to cut corners to increase profitability, but also seek to paywall everything. In fact, they will often charge authors for the right to publish their own research. Many institutions and governments now insist that government- or institutionally-supported academic research (i.e., books and articles) also be made available in some form (usually a pre-print version) freely, as an "open access text." Generally, in order to do that, the author has to pay the publisher for the right to print an early draft in open access. This is what is sometimes called the "Gold Open Access" model, and it literally means that you are paying Elsevier or whomever for the right to disseminate your own research. tl;dr -- the system sucks, academic publishing is becoming more and more corrupt and ethically suspect, and researchers are losing control over their own research. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolig Loon Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 9 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: Aren't publishers and journals often guilty of being more interested in publishing for $$ than ethics? "Often" depends on who's counting and how cynical they are, I imagine. "Sometimes" might be more accurate. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayashe Ninetails Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Well, this is Elsevier which, despite being one of the largest and most important academic publishers in the world (they own Lancet, which is the premier medical journal in the world), is also notorious for . . . dumb and highly questionable doings. They're unethical as hell, and got caught a few decades back "publishing" fake medical journals in order to boost their metrics. That's horrid. I'm less shocked about the AI use now. It feels super weird to me to let AI run amok in the medical writing field as I only work with models that are straight up forbidden from engaging in that topic (or any topic requiring professional advice, really), which is why I'm okay with some forms of AI use. It's easy for me to forget that AI is in all kinds of fields now - including STEM. Terrifying! Come to think of it - Wasn't there an attorney who got caught using AI to write his motions or something? I have my own peeves about legal writing (I found out from my time doing transcription for a law firm that much of it gets dictated on long bus/train rides by exhausted attorneys, which would explain a LOT), but I can't see how AI makes that any better. Peeve: I am not hopeful we're going to get over this fad any time soon, and I am really not fond of it. Edited March 15 by Ayashe Ninetails Added stuffs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolig Loon Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 5 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Publishing academic work is simply part of most academics' job description. A great many journals publish at a loss, and are kept afloat only through grant money or institutional support. This has been true for a very long time. It would be rare to write a grant application in the sciences and not include a budget for paying page charges. Academic publishing comes at a cost that is spread among the learned societies, granting agencies, academic institutions, and individual researchers, each of whom has an interest in supporting research. There have always been arguments about how much of the total should fall on each of those parties, but all understand the game. I can only recall one or two times that I have published an article without paying some of the cost either out of grant funds or my own pocket. Edited March 15 by Rolig Loon Added text for clarification. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said: This has been true for a very long time. It would rare to write a grant application in the sciences and not include a budget for paying page charges. Academic publishing comes at a cost that is spread among the learned societies, granting agencies, academic institutions, and individual researchers, each of whom has an interest in supporting research. There have always been arguments about how much of the total should fall on each of those parties, but all understand the game. I can only recall one or two times that I have published an article without paying some of the cost either out of grant funds or my own pocket. No, it's not, as you say, especially new -- in fact, I had an extended discussion (a mostly friendly one, happily) on my blog 10 years ago on just this subject with an academic who had published a piece in an Eslevier journal on marriage in Second Life. But there is a difference between "cost sharing" when one is distributing the costs among non-profit institutions and organizations, and essentially subsidizing enormously profitable megacorporations who are simultaneously also attempting to corner the market on access to academic research. In Canada, the Tri-Council granting agencies (SSHRCC, NSERC, and CIRH) moved to a model about 10 years ago that made open-access publication of supported research a compulsory component of the grant. Because, on average, the fees for a Gold Open Access publication are in the US$2500-3500 range, researchers are forced to build such fees into their grant applications, with the result that the government is essentially subsidizing enormously wealthy publishers who were actually restricting access to publication for the right to make available government-funded work that was intended to be public. It's also had the effect that it's now difficult to write and publish academic work without a grant if you want it published in a high-profile journal (as one generally does for a variety of reasons, as I'm sure you know), because most ordinary academics can't afford the open access publication fees. The entire system has pivoted so that it is centred on the financial well-being of the for-profit publishing companies. If it's not in some ways benefiting an Eslevier or a Springer, that odds are increasingly that it's going to be difficult to publish academic research in a form that is high-impact. Edited March 15 by Scylla Rhiadra extra word 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 34 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said: That's horrid. I'm less shocked about the AI use now. It feels super weird to me to let AI run amok in the medical writing field as I only work with models that are straight up forbidden from engaging in that topic (or any topic requiring professional advice, really), which is why I'm okay with some forms of AI use. It's easy for me to forget that AI is in all kinds of fields now - including STEM. Terrifying! Come to think of it - Wasn't there an attorney who got caught using AI to write his motions or something? I have my own peeves about legal writing (I found out from my time doing transcription for a law firm that much of it gets dictated on long bus/train rides by exhausted attorneys, which would explain a LOT), but I can't see how AI makes that any better. Peeve: I am not hopeful we're going to get over this fad any time soon, and I am really not fond of it. I think it will settle down once the actual benefits and limitations of AI become more evident, and the inevitable hype cycle has passed. I think AI is certainly going to have an enormous impact on . . . everything. But I'm reasonably hopeful that we'll be managing it sensibly before any really lasting damage is incurred. New technologies are like this, right? In an academic context, I remember 15 years ago when the hype was around "MOOCs," or "Massively Online Open Courses," with 10s or even 100s of thousands of students enrolled in a single online course with automated grading and evaluation, etc. MOOCs were going to render mortar-and-brick universities obsolete, and put most academics out of a job. Well, we have more online courses now, for sure, although that may owe more to COVID than to MOOC hype. But universities aren't going anywhere. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Istelathis Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 23 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: I think it will settle down once the actual benefits and limitations of AI become more evident, and the inevitable hype cycle has passed. I wonder if it will be like the information super highway 🤣 Now we all are just so used to it that it doesn't seem as miraculous as it once was. Although I could see AI taking over teachers, especially where I live and there is a shortage due to low pay, high stress, and being overworked. I think one of the reasons why we still see school being used, is for the structure and socializing, and also it more or less is a free daycare for working parents. This could be what students are instructed by in the future, if it saves money. I know people will say that will never fly, but in the area I live in most people repeatedly refuse to increase taxes to support their schools, they outright are horrible to educators, always claiming they make a fortune (lol, absolute rubbish) and have easy jobs. People will complain, but with a teacher shortage, a budget shortage, and people voting against doing anything about it, I could see them slowly being introduced into school systems as assistants - from there as the technology advances, start to take on more roles as people become more familiar with them. As it stands now, we are dealing with larger and larger classes with fewer educators, I don't think this is unrealistic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Nagy Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 1 hour ago, Istelathis said: Although I could see AI taking over teachers, especially where I live and there is a shortage due to low pay, high stress, and being overworked. Knowledge and producing that knowledge in small digestible portions at the right time, is only a part of teaching. Teaching is far more complex than that. AI will not take over from educators any time soon, I have no doubt about that. Machines that are AI driven can become helpful tools in schools though and take over specific tasks, just like computers do for a few decades already. Edited March 15 by Sid Nagy 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Istelathis Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 38 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said: AI will not take from educators any time soon, I have no doubt about that. I don't know, not in my area at any rate. At this point, the students in my state are not learning very much in fact they are just pushed through the system. There is a growing concern of our nation's IQ score lowering for the first time. The students aren't really learning anymore, it is becoming more of a madhouse where teachers are more so trying to keep their students inline, rather than being able to teach them anything. There is no real discipline here, just overstuffed classrooms, the kind of thing that is driving only more teachers away from the profession. I imagine at some point, there will be robot assistants wandering around in classes, helping students out. I would say they could just do this with computers, but having a physical presence of a humanoid that interacts with you is more likely to establish a connection whereas a screen is most likely to be ignored. Unless of course, people are willing to pay more in taxes to afford more educators, I just don't think it is likely at all. I think it is going to be this way in a lot of fields, not just education. If people are willing to spend extra on other people, then sure, but realistically that is never the course we have taken. It is the reason why our auto industry has faded, why Walmarts closed a multitude of mom and pop shops, why chain stores in general do so well. I think people will normally default to the cheapest means, which inevitably will mean more AI in our lives, even as instructors in our schools. Edited March 15 by Istelathis 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 55 minutes ago, Istelathis said: This could be what students are instructed by in the future, if it saves money. Peeve: the things I know students will try to get away with, if teachers become AI's. Snogging in class, for example. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Can see the day coming if not already arrived where AI Reviewed carries greater weight and more reputable than Peer Reviewed 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Istelathis Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said: Peeve: the things I know students will try to get away with, if teachers become AI's. Snogging in class, for example. Not if they are Catholic robot nuns 🙃 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayashe Ninetails Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: I think it will settle down once the actual benefits and limitations of AI become more evident, and the inevitable hype cycle has passed. I think AI is certainly going to have an enormous impact on . . . everything. But I'm reasonably hopeful that we'll be managing it sensibly before any really lasting damage is incurred. New technologies are like this, right? In an academic context, I remember 15 years ago when the hype was around "MOOCs," or "Massively Online Open Courses," with 10s or even 100s of thousands of students enrolled in a single online course with automated grading and evaluation, etc. MOOCs were going to render mortar-and-brick universities obsolete, and put most academics out of a job. Well, we have more online courses now, for sure, although that may owe more to COVID than to MOOC hype. But universities aren't going anywhere. Fantastic point! This does remind me that I still do see plenty of remote offers for teachers and tutors and coaches for online learning (and yes, COVID had a big impact on that) - everything from full-on K-12 grade school/high school courses to specific career and language training (40-something pages on FlexJobs alone). That's very different from brick-and-mortar schools and universities of course, and they certainly have challenges in this here 2024, but it's still good to see a demand. I guessssssssss we'll be okay. I guesssssssssssss. 34 minutes ago, Sid Nagy said: Knowledge and producing that knowledge in small digestible portions at the right time, is only a part of teaching. Teaching is far more complex than that. AI will not take from educators any time soon, I have no doubt about that. Machines that are AI driven can become helpful tools in schools though and take over specific tasks, just like computers do for a few decades already. I'll defer to the teachers on this, but Sid makes a great point, too. Much of my learning occurred long after class was over. I used to stay behind to chat with my teachers a lot and sometimes we'd have some of the most insightful conversations - just about life in general. One had me shook for days because of something she brought up that hit me like a ton of bricks. She taught modern art, but her own field outside of the classroom was far different (she studied the cirrrrrrrcle of liiiiiiiife, basically, lol) and the discussion went in a whoooole other direction. Damn near brought me to tears, I was so moved. Educators do so, so much that AI cannot replicate. Peeve: We don't hug our teachers enough. *hugs all the teachers* 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 1 hour ago, Sid Nagy said: AI will not take from educators any time soon, I have no doubt about that. I can see the advantage of learning from a humanoid AI rather than a human in that the student does not need to develop an interpersonal relationship with each and every educator they meet. For those sort of students who find relationships challenging, a consistent humanoid teacher could seem like a bonus. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Nagy Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) Peeve: People who think that teaching is so easy that a machine can easily take over. Yeah right. I heard the stories all before, but then it were the PC's who would make teachers obsolete. Edited March 15 by Sid Nagy 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now