It could perhaps in time create a song that is, on the surface, indistinguishable from an original, but it will always be a replication, a kind of burlesque.
I support this statement because even though this is new and revolutionary technology the reality is that no matter what all it will ever be able to produce is information that has already been programmed into it or that it took from another source and therefor lacks creativity and emotion.
learning stuff is accomplished through doing stuff. Learning is rooted in experiences
I think that this passage is a good one for educators because in my experience the classes that I have had where the professors or teachers made the content more engaging and relevant to real world problems rather than just reading slides word for word or just referring students to learning from the book, were the ones where I was able to learn the most.
rather than using this as an opportunity to exam the kind of work we actually ask students (and faculty) to do around learning.
This portion of this article stood out to me because I think that while this question is being asked more frequently today as a result of AI systems like Chat GPT it is one that I have thought about for years while going through school. It reminds me of the extensive hours that I wasted in school being taught information that has never been relevant to me.
Maybe it’s just a nifty tool thatwill be mostly used by students
While many schools and individual teachers are banning students from using this type of technology I think that they should be encouraging students to learn how to use it effectively.
But users havefound ways around many of these guardrails
I thought this was interesting because while ChatGPT is considered to be relatively better at monitoring the content that it produces I have seen a lot of cases of people being able to bypass its security measures pretty easily.