plinky

It just been getting under my skin that famous "marxists" doing tea leaves polisci reading, like i'm sure there are people like jason hockel engaging with input output tables, but zizek being the most famous is just dire. same for french dipshits of the 60s

tel-aviv delenda est

abundance begs to differ

the person being criticized due to "inventing the guy to be mad at". but tbh, i don't think this text needed marxism at all, from both sides. you can make same arguments as a lib arguing with conservative.

alleged reactionary socialism with its elites talks about elites degradation/moral debasement as a problem. their existence is a problem, why should marxists care what they think, their function is to apply capital for maximum return. Them doing some brownian exploratory motion of idea space is whatever, sometimes might be good, sometimes might be shit.

inventing the guy to be mad at and citing zero economic numbers, this is the essence of marxists engaged in cultural thinking. avoid at all costs

kent state was popular at the time

gotta maybe bring more awareness into how it works ("probabilistic next word predictor") to teachers (?), i doubt teachers are that deep into it, and prolly see it as a magic box. it obviously can make some stuff easier, like email bullshit (fairly unnatural language exercise to remove legal/personal liabilities) and some coding

oh no, i'm a mere guardian of the line, watcher of the beans

(i started checking them after memes, to be clear)

feel like future of sinking ships is small subs/tor🅱edos, when some smartypants figures out underwater communications or starlink analogues won't be geofenced.

Water is an ideal medium to deliver couple of tons of tnt, and slow speed and small size breaks a lot of echolocation tech, launches are undetectable, energy requirements - very small.

i wonder how big of an underwater explosion can sink small ship via density reduction

what i meant is this (stem is more my experience, so i go there): typical approach is "i explain stuff, demonstrate how explained stuff applies to an example, now do 10 examples to understand how it works, now do 1 example in controlled environment (test/exam), congratulation you can now do stuff" what ai/cheating in general can do is: simulate you doing 10 examples of stuff, and then do 1 example in a live test, and according to metrics "you can now do stuff".

If you can't force check that student done their homework, then they have to do it in class. it requires rather serious plan change, but i guess you can't do that without education bigwigs interfering?

poor people being unmurdered is direct threat to ~~money laundering operations~~ british way of life

i would talk individually to people, starting from "should people be able to read, if text recognition can read for them on their phone ", you bullshitting around with people on same (professional) level doesn't have same repercussions as talking back to your boss, win hearts and minds

And solution to ai stuff in education is always obvious, oral/written exams instead of tests, just probably no time (budget) for teachers to do it.