[jorgemf]

I think your argument is similar to the one we had with the calculators and later with Internet. I think ChatGPT is another tool. For sure there is going to be lazy people who use it and won't learn anything, but it also sure it is going to be a boost for so many people. We will adapt.

[bloppe]

Calculators solve problems that have exactly one correct answer. You cannot plagiarize a calculator. They are easy to incorporate into a math curriculum while ensuring that it stays educationally valuable to the students.

LLM's, the internet, even physical books all tend to deal primarily with subjective matters that can be plagiarized. They're not fundamentally different from each other; the more advanced technologies like search engines or LLM's simply make it easier to find relevant content that can be copied. They actually remove the need for students to think for themselves in a way calculators never did. LLM's just make it so easy to commit plagiarism that the system is starting to break down. Plagiarism was always a problem, but it used to be rare enough that the education system could sort-of tolerate it.

[argiopetech]

I argue that calculators are overtly harmful to arithmetic prowess. In summary, they atrophy mental arithmetic ability and discourage practice of basic skills.

It pains me (though that's my problem) to see people pull out a calculator (worse, a phone) to solve e.g., a multiplication of two single digit numbers.

[bloppe]

Sure, calculators made people worse at mental arithmetic, but arithmetic is mechanical. It's helpful sometimes, but it's not intellectually stimulating and it doesn't require much intelligence. Mathematicians don't give a shit about arithmetic. They're busy thinking about much more important things.

Synthesizing an original thesis, like what people are supposed to do in writing essays, is totally different. It's a fundamental life skill people will need in all sorts of contexts, and using an LLM to do it for you takes away your intellectual agency in a way that using a calculator doesn't.

[argiopetech]

Engineers care about arithmetic. Carpenters do too. Any number of other creative endeavors require (or, at least, are dramatically improved) by the ability to make basic calculations (even if approximate) quickly in your head.

Arithmetic is the "write one sentence" of composition. The ability to think through a series of calculations with real-world context and consequences is the 5-paragraph essay. If you're not competent with the basics, you won't be able to accomplish the more advanced skill. Being tied to a calculator (not merely using, but being unable to not use) takes away intellectual agency in the same way as an LLM-generated essay (though, I'll agree, to a lesser degree).

[zaat]

> Mathematicians don't give a shit about arithmetic

Sure, once you know how to multiply you don't care about it. But try learning first year CS math without being able to multiply without perfect command of the multiplication table

[allturtles]

Exactly. My wife tutors kids at the high school who never mastered arithmetic and are trying to learn algebra. It's hopeless.

[pulvinar]

That was true before calculators too. Correlation, causation.

[nicklaf]

> They're busy thinking about much more important things.

Generally I agree (because the content of modern mathematics is largely abstract), but to nitpick a bit, number theory is part of mathematics too!

Ramanujan and Euler, for example, certainly cared a lot about 'arithmetic', and historically, many parts of mathematics have been just as 'empirical' in terms of calculating things as they've been based on abstract proof.

[tnel77]

Two single digit numbers is indeed sad, but I pull out a calculator daily to do math I could have done in my head. I don’t feel that that is inherently bad.

[tnel77]

Not exactly related, but your comment about plagiarism made me think of my days of writing papers and citing APA style. How do you cite a source if it came from ChatGPT and it likely doesn’t fully understand where it got its information?

[Telemakhos]

You don't. You're only supposed to cite primary sources and peer-reviewed secondary sources. ChatGPT is a tertiary source, like dictionaries and encylopediae. You use tertiary sources to get a quick overview of a topic before you begin delving into primary and secondary sources, but you never include tertiary material in your paper.

[tnel77]

Good to know. Thank you for the response!

[noitpmeder]

It'll happy generate sources for you -- just be aware that most of the citations will be bogus. Not sure how many teachers/professors test the validity of citations.

[tnel77]

I’m guessing they will have to start checking. Even if it’s just sampling a few for validity.

[gmerc]

Facts can not be plagiarized.

Copyright protects specific expression, which reproducing is specifically a non goal with LLMs

[bloppe]

Plagiarism and copyright violation are subtly different. Plagiarism is just presenting someone (or something) else's work as your own. It may or may not be a copyright violation.

[ignoramous]

This semester, I regularly conduct RFC / whitepaper / chapter reading sessions during my hours. I let students use perplexity.ai, bard, chatgpt to help them understand what they otherwise can't.

Once they're done, they submit a one-pager on 3 to 5 subtle / smaller / things they find the most interesting or counter intuitive. At the end of the semester, I intend to share all their one-pagers among all of their classmates and keep an open-book test on it. Let's see how that pans out.

[danielbln]

I hope it is successful. I'm too old to be in primary education anymore, but I would have loved to have access to an LLM during that time that I can pester with an infinite amount of questions until I grok the subject matter

[theprivacydad]

A calculator is an impressive single-function tool. LLMs and other forms of AI are multi-function problem solving tools. ChatGPT and other AI tools are closer to the introduction of the world wide web than they are to the invention of the calculator.