Immediately after switching the page, it will work with CSR.
Please reload your browser to see how it works.
Maybe long division wasn't a particularly necessary skill (though I think learning arithmetic algorithms is beneficial). But calculators could only complete a small subset of school assignments, while the set of traditional school assignments that gen AI cannot complete is getting smaller and smaller.
On the other hand, the game of "turn in assignments until you have enough grade letters to get a piece of paper" game seems to be over, at least in its recent form.
oof
This was right as generative AI was coming out and back when it would struggle with this type of analysis.
The first analysis was done the old-fashioned way – you had to understand what you were looking at, you had to know what to do with the data, and had to be willing to work through uncertainty. The assignment: take this raw data and make recommendations to the channel owner on what to do (left open for interpretation).
Results? - 30% of submissions were terrible. - 60% were good, though not really complete. - 10% were amazing, producing creative recommendations, and better than I expected.
The semester after that I did something I never did before: I assigned the same thing. The same data and instructions, but this time with the requirement to use AI in the analysis.
Results? - Much of the worst work decreased. Only 5% of submissions were terrible. - 90%+ were good. - But at most 5% were amazing. AI usage had mostly eliminated the worst results (30% in the first attempt), but it had also hurt the top output (the 10%), with results condensed toward the center. In some cases this might be the outcome you want, but in other situations you might want to take some terrible results so that you can also benefit from the excellent ones.
Or be disciplined enough not to let AI completely think for you.
> This is written of a future. Not the future, but a future – one of many possibilities.
reminded me of the opening line from Tom Scott's The Artificial Intelligence That Deleted A Century https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JlxuQ7tPgQ
> This is a YouTube video from a future. Not the future, just a future.
Not sure if intentional or if you're both referencing something else, fun parallel nonetheless.
A second fallacy is that AI art is public. Not true, most of it is seen exactly one time by human eyes. It is a private affair, and doesn't need to be perfect if it captures the intent of the user. Art made for one.