@OfficialLoganK@emollick People and businesses have put their trust in Gemini, Google and you, to offer a SOTA model, and now risk losing clients unless moving away from Gemini. When - roughly - will 3.5 pro launch?
@glukianoff Dangerously close to thought police, especially if you use AI discursively as your ‘system 3’ extended mind to think things through… Not smart.
@SteveStuWill@ProfByron The Bell Curve cast a long shadow - not much found today in many undergraduate psych courses/text books on IQ, apart from claims that IQ tests are useless.
@DaveVoelkerPhD@CJFerguson1111 You can discount social desirability bias, but not sure you can avoid it unless the subject/respondent doesn’t know they are being observed. Projective techniques are still performative.
@newstart_2024 We said the same about paper. Vector of bad ideas, bad habits, antisocial behaviour - people with their nose in books rather than interacting with others.
@emollick Not convinced? I’ve found this approach; LLMs as conversational thought partners, not cheating tools, as the only solution works in higher ed - but only for those motivated by cognitive engagement. Those open to cognitive surrender will just cheat themselves out of an education…
@kevinroose Not usually the fault of academics, but academic publishers and their sclerotic review process, where reviewers are either not paid or so poorly paid that it’s not a priority. No one week review, and by the time a study is published it’s obsolete.
@acagamic Semantics, but I’d say focus on the problem, not the pain. The human mind is a problem solving device - research is a problem solving activity. Framing a paper around the problem, and its consequences can be a good attention hook.