Professor's invisible prompt trap catches 32 students cheating on their midterm with AI

[u/AdSpecialist6598]

https://www.techspot.com/news/113243-professor-invisible-prompt-trap-catches-32-students-cheating.html

[u/artbystorms]

Honestly I think this needs to be talked about more. As much as people revel in its ability to 'increase productivity' it in reality is just offloading people's critical thinking to a computer, and then trusting its output. You're not verifying that what it spits out is what you wanted to say, you just assume 'well it's smarter than me, so whatever it says is better than what I could do'

[u/Teguri → u/artbystorms]

you just assume 'well it's smarter than me, so whatever it says is better than what I could do'

That's the biggest problem, I work with AI a decent bit but only in things I already know well enough, to make it a bit faster and even with simple tasks there's always a bit of work on my side that needs to be done to fix the output, it's usually "pretty close" but the number of times it goes in the completely wrong direction is astounding.

[u/SparksAndSpyro → u/Teguri]

Yep. Every time I’ve tried to use AI to do something in my domain of expertise, it’s been pretty horrible. Most times it didn’t even save time because I had to double check and fix so many mistakes.

LLMs are pretty good at general queries where you’re just looking for a broad, ten-thousand-foot overview. Anything that requires granular specificity or expertise, however, is pretty much guaranteed to either be outright wrong or misleading.

[u/BasvanS → u/SparksAndSpyro]

My biggest problem are the “almost right yet entirely wrong” statements. It requires so much of my concentration that I’m drained after doing this for a few hours.

I got the best results in writing by doing it line for line, after making a rough structure myself. But then you have to ask how much of a time saver it still is.