Because all persons are created equal, but corporate persons are more equal than others.

Looks like I misread that part while on the bus. Makes sense then and the statistics are more significant (and aligns with my personal experience), but I personally would still like to see the numbers in context.

“In November, a UC San Diego Academic Senate work group report said it documented a roughly thirty-fold increase between 2020 and 2025 in incoming first-year students whose math skills tested below high school level. The report said 70% of those students fell below middle school levels.”

I am going to copy my response to this quote, word-for-word from Reddit, to here. Just to check if I would get a different reaction, or that I’m in the wrong here.

I wonder if the reactions to this quote itself qualify as an indicator for the overall lack of critical thinking skills.

The quoted line fails to address what the baseline for the 30% increase is. Which fails to provide a frame of reference as to what percentage of overall admissions are failing basic math then and now. The 30% could be applied to 0.5% of total admissions, or it could apply to 65% of total admissions. The article itself does not say. Likewise, the 70% number is also compounding on top of the 30%, which makes it meaningless. The increase here could very easily fall within the margin of error.

Given the number of numerical examples given in the article, it is unlikely these statistics were chosen while more convincing data exists, which calls into question what the author’s motivation is here.

That being said, this is not an attempt to reject the problem presented in the article. We are seeing homework grades skyrocketing while in-class exam grades cratering year-over-year for the last 3 academic years, most likely to be caused by improved problem solving LLMs and a lack of knowledge retention by the students. Fundamentally, we do not have any better metric to determine student success that is not spoofed by AI, especially for the case of theory-heavy courses. In-class responses of upper-division courses also indicate less people interacting with the course content, which either be tied to disinterest or less critical thinking in class.

As for returning to Standardized Testing. I think this is a “damned if you don’t, damned if you do” decision. While standardized testing can act as an indicator for critical thinking, it can also quickly turn into a memorization contest where whoever has the best prep courses wins all. In the latter case, given the costs associated with testing and test prep, it is obvious who this benefits. In addition to this, standardized testing disadvantages students that are neurodivergent or have learning disabilities, where the test taking environment itself affects students grades regardless of how much prep is done.

If it’s fuel, what happens when you take a match to it?

Let’s be honest, we all keep talking. The question is who put a mic in front of this bumbling idiot.

Or who knows, maybe someone put a mic there to let him self-destruct. One can hope.

Before anyone comments saying “only the brain damaged would apply for a green card now”, I would like to point out that the timeline for PR takes anywhere from years or decades.

These aren’t people who filed after T-virus got in the White House, these are people who have been betting their lives and savings on living in the US 10-20 years ago. If you pull out now, it may be viewed as a negative factor to bar you from ever seeing your friends and family in the US ever again.

Welcome back FDR fireside chat.

In what way? The guy hasn’t been involved in a Final Fantasy game for 25+ years. He isn’t even part of Square Enix for Globs sake. The only thing tying him to the franchise is that he started it and directed it in the early days. Whatever his opinions on AI is it’s not going into Final Fantasy. And based on Mythwalker studios game output I don’t think it’s going there either. The man is basically retired and looking back at fanart.

Someone claimed the following, quote “my 8 year old would love this on her backpack, if she had $400 to spend”.

Pretty accurate description I’d say.

I don’t actually have a dedicated kit of stuff for watches, but what I use for fountain pen maintenance + iFixIt toolkit gets me 90% of the way there. Other than that, it’s just specific screwdriver bits and a watch case back opener (if you’re dealing with anything airtight)

I’ve been lurking in various watch-related forums right before this release, and all the drama leading up to this has been hilarious:

FYI: this “watch” is a collab between a brand (swatch) that makes <$100 disposable watches (the watch movement is sealed such that you can’t repair/maintain it) and a brand (AP) that makes $30k watches with a long waiting list. The collab was announced first, then the specs of the watch, then the actual watch itself (being on a keychain?). Each round of announcements led to a new wave of drama.

1. There are people mad that this collab devalues their $30k watch brand
2. There are people mad that the watch is an exact plastic replica of their $30k AP Royal Oak
3. There are people mad that the collab watch doesn’t come on a strap, but is instead a glorified keychain
4. There are people mad that said keychain comes at a price of $400, is plastic, and cannot be maintained (mechanical watches need regular maintenance, this plastic piece is destined for the trash in 4-5 years)
5. There are people mad about the colors
6. There are people mad that said colors devalue their $30k watch
7. There are scalpers selling the watch on eBay before the watch was released for $3k
8. There are strap makers making 3D printed straps for the thing as soon as the watch was announced, at the price point of the watch itself ($400)
9. The release event almost entirely consisted of scalpers. Every reasonable watch person thinks it’s overpriced garbage
10. This is NOT a limited release watch. These plastic watches will fill the oceans for years to come
11. Swatch had to close stores due to public safety issues with these scalpers
12. There are scalpers that stole a “sorry were closed today” paper sign from a swatch store and selling it on eBay

The best part: nobody is actually interested in the watch. It’s almost all scalpers and people owning a $30k watch having a meltdown.

Edit: if you are looking for a <$400 mechanical watch that is worth the money, I recommend the Seiko 5 or Orient Bambino instead of this plastic toy. Learn to regulate and maintain it by yourself, it’s easier than it looks. My Max Bill runs at a rate of +0.5s per day after regulation. Watching a fully mechanical minute hand sweep (as well as the date flicking over instantly at midnight) is such a joy.

This is practically impossible. We have proverbially locked the keys in the room. IP/UDP/TCP are here to stay due to the prevalence of buggy/nonstandard middleboxes (hardware firewalls, ASIC switches, NAT routers) in the Internet.

We have new protocols, new theories for networking (look at NDN, in which is physically incapable of being censored or ddosed). However, anything that doesn’t conform to existing IP/TCP/UDP will get dropped by these so-called “middleboxes”. Even things that DO conform to IP/TCP/UDP will sometimes get dropped by these middleboxes (e.g. new TCP extensions, QUIC, etc). We cannot build an Internet replacement without almost fully scrapping every piece of networking equipment deployed since the 90s.

Middleboxes were supposed to be a temporary solution until we could transition to a new protocol like IPv6. Companies went for the cheap solution and violated the end-to-end principle of networking instead. Now we’re paying the price and stuck with it.

Some instructors don’t supervise grad course exams for the following reasons:

1. Grad school grading is a joke anyways, everyone gets a B+ at minimum
2. The content is so state of the art you won’t be able to cheat. You won’t find reasonable answers online, or on your neighbors exam
3. If you’re paying full tuition for grad school and still slacking off, that’s on you personally.

Because the goal is to get people to learn/think about something. We don’t care what you use as long as you retain knowledge taught in the course. If what helps you learn is LLMs, then go for it.

Problem right now is there is a significant amount of people that are using these tools to do the thinking for them. And this is when Office Hours, Homework feedback, Email (I guarantee all students emails are responded to within 24hrs. Most are handled within 30 minutes) are all available and paid for (by tuition). I am even happy to schedule one-on-ones if privacy is a concern, but none of this is being utilized.

Let’s be honest, with their attendance rate in class, I don’t think these students actually vote…

We are allowing LLMs for all of our homeworks. As long as you can solve the problems in the indicated way with a reasonable answer.

In case you are not sure about the “indicated way”, there are practice questions with detailed step-by-step solutions for each hw problem that you just have to change the numbers/equations a bit and you’ll get points.

What we’ve noticed is that the year-after-year averages are significantly higher, especially this year. However, students are bringing in details that we explicitly didn’t go over in lecture and putting that on the homework (e.g. Delayed branching in Computer Architecture, because it’s a random quirk of MIPS that even assembly programmers don’t have to deal with). None of these details are ever mentioned in lecture or the practice homeworks (in a few cases, they are mentioned with the explicit wording “do not worry about this now”)

We can only assume people are copying the homework into LLMs and copying the results straight down. The latest exam had a question where students were asked to analyze a specific chunk of assembly code to deduce certain properties about it. Approximately 20-30% of the students didn’t know the FORMAT to answer it, despite it literally being item 1 on last week’s homework.

And when I say format, I don’t mean exactly “you must write these exact words or you lose points”. It’s literally just point out “line A and B have this property X because of attribute Y”. Just including ABXY as shown in the practice homework is enough. But apparently people are too lazy to read a 10 bullet point answer…