Schlagwort: KI

Prompting is the new Smoking.

We have been here before, both with entanglements of AI and statistics with industry corrupting our academic processes, and with so-called AI summers: hype cycles that pivot from funding booms to complete busts and cessation of research [...]

The foreseeable AI winter will take with it entire curricula, academic processes and practices, and educators’ and learners’ livelihoods. [...]

There is circular reasoning at play when we suggest and assume machines can think, reason, or argue like humans can, and therefore, treat them — and test them — like humans. [...]

The only argument from ignorance that science permits is caution, more research, and care as appropriate actions when something is truly unknown. [...]

Teaching about AI technologies should be just like how we teach ‘no smoking’ or the causal links between lung cancer and cigarette smoke; yet, we do not teach students how to roll cigarettes and smoke them. [...]

In thinking about implications for the design of learning environments and curriculum design, we first need to pause and think about what we really would like AI tools to do, or, put differently, what might be the added value of the use of AI tools in education — if any? [...]

AI users, on the other hand, are customers much more like the person buying the end product of woodwork than carpenters themselves. [...]

[W]ith the proliferation of AI products and their uncritical adoption in academia, we become unable to help younger generations of scholars in learning to uphold and to appreciate scientific integrity. As a result, we will be deskilling the whole academic profession, a direct threat to the ecosystem of human knowledge.

Guest, O., Suarez, M., Müller, B., van Meerkerk, E., Oude Groote Beverborg, A., de Haan, R., Reyes Elizondo, A., Blokpoel, M., Scharfenberg, N., Kleinherenbrink, A., Camerino, I., Woensdregt, M., Monett, D., Brown, J., Avraamidou, L., Alenda-Demoutiez, J., Hermans, F., & van Rooij, I. (2025). Against the Uncritical Adoption of 'AI' Technologies in Academia. Zenodo.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17065099

Precision or Prediction.

Ist es genau oder ist es GenAI?

Define inclusivly.

I’d rather live in a world that embraces change and welcomes more people into our craft than one that raises barriers to entry.

Jan Gregor Emge-Triebel: Whats's in a programmer

Stop the hAIpe.

Why would we, as academics, be eager to use and advertise this kind of product?

Maybe we, academics, have become so accustomed to offloading our thinking to machine learning algorithms that we cannot think critically anymore (see e.g. Spanton and Guest, 2021; Guest and Martin, 2022; van Rooij, 2020), making us susceptible to believe false, misleading and hyped claims? Or maybe we are afraid to exercise our independent decision making capacity and say “No” to automated bias, hype, misinformation and otherwise harmful technology? Or maybe privileged academics are just fine with enabling the agendas of multimillion dollar companies founded by people motivated by capitalist and bigoted ideologies? Or maybe a mix of these things?

Iris van Rooij: Stop feeding the hype and start resisting

CrapGPT by Closed AI.

So for now, you don’t see yourself using ChatGPT’s software?

„Absolutely not. One of the main reasons being that it’s not open AI at all, even though they say it is. You can use this version online, but I can’t download it and use it in other software."

Piek Vossen