|
|
|
|
|
by 15457345234
864 days ago
|
|
When you ask an AI for a list of citations and it returns a list of 10 names, pages and dates no amount of 'critical thinking' will let you determine which answers are correct or incorrect, you have to sit there and painfully cross-reference each one. The 'critical thinking' part at this point in time leads you to only one conclusion: that the tool is unreliable and dangerous and shouldn't be used. Or, you're teaching kids that they need to cross-reference all 'authoritative sources' which leads to a complete failure of the system - if you give kids a textbook will they have been 'trained' by GPT to not believe a word of any of the claims in it without cross-referencing? How does that enable better education. If you provide a tool from a position of authority it needs to be a reliable and believable tool; standing in a position of authority and handing out access (to children!) to a lie box and asking those children to 'rely on it' is frankly abusive. That's beyond mixed messaging, that's just some form of weird mental torture. |
|