As strange as it is to say, it is hard not to conclude that the value of knowing things — I don’t mean the value of *knowledge* in the abstract, or of this or that *type of knowledge*, but of *people knowing things* — is simply not a matter of consensus, even within institutions of higher education.

I agree with sentiments I’ve seen expressed to the effect that the rush to generative AI is an opportunity to see best what is human; if human understanding isn’t the point of education then I don’t think there is a point to it. That said, it is only an opportunity, and we’ve passed those up before.

Educators do not speak with one voice even on, say, generative AI in the classroom. There are resources and a certain kind of institutional power to be got by embracing it. Many parents are swayed by techno-determinism and market rhetoric. Students understandably want to secure what future they can.

I used to think that, in the absence of administrative leadership — or rather, in the face of institutional weakness and resistance — some combination of teachers, students and parents might hold the line. I’m no longer convinced that there is enough agreement on what any such line is to be hopeful.

They are doing so, of course, asymmetrically. Some schools are keeping their libraries, and the books in them. Some schools are keeping their humanities and basic science departments and language programs. Some schools are keeping tenure (though few or none are expanding it). Still, it’s a fight.

I will add: there’s a sense in which we (I speak as a learner not a teacher now; or as both) have always had to fight to get an education out of institutions of learning. A capacity for gamification or proceduralism is built into any system. But the resources for fighting that fight are shrinking.

“it’s just a tool” becomes unconvincing when entrepreneurship means leveraging power to make it impossible for people to avoid your product, and creating problems for whomever doesn’t use it

the single defining “new technology” of the 21st century is in fact nothing more than the subscription, an early modern innovation

Admin are continually pressuring us to make the course "more accessible," by which they mean "devastatingly easy to complete," but it's not about access. Many students refuse to read or write in any capacity that isn't tech-aided, no matter how simple the assignment, no matter how process-based.

It's only a matter of time before humanities departments will be forced to accept AI-authored assignments, as part of revised university policy to cooperate with these billionaires. It's already happening, and our response needs to be decisive. Because our students' ability to *think* is at stake.

And I swear, once again, this is not dunking on kids. We are seeing this at all levels--even grad students. AI + social media has had a profound impact on how we think and process our world, and we can't stop to reflect on it, because billionaires keep hurling addictive tech at us.

Universities are assembling larger and larger teams to deal with academic integrity issues--mostly focused on AI--while simultaneously holding AI "writing" contests, AI-themed events, "hey, come play with these fun tools!" The messages are so mixed, it's criminal. Because AI is bloated with money.

I will again say to my colleagues at these institutions, what do you plan to do about your leadership sacrificing the future of your institution for the lesser evil of collaborating with these people?

Gonna be a *lot* of inedible and dangerous dishes and at least one family annihilation as a result of people casually asking chatgpt for a recipe

i think it's also pretty bad faith to pretend every criticism is invalid because some people are upset this stuff is being forced on them at work while threatening the stability of the entire economy and being used to create the hard right federal government's propaganda machine

What makes my head combust is how many conversations I had with self satisfied American and British and Western European ‘liberals’ etc over the past decade on the global threat posed by Indian fascism, and how easily they all dismissed it. Because it couldn’t possibly impact them, as they saw it