I didn't feel inclined to upvote any. The system is there to point out factual errors. Differences of opinion can be posted in the comments (Xed?) as usual. "Two tier myth" seems to be opinion to me. There may have been a public note which disappeared - it's an upvote/downvote type system.
The AI policy starts at the bottom of page 5. Students have to mention any use of AI, even generating ideas. They must include an appendix with "the entire exchange, highlighting the most relevant sections" and provide an explanation for how and why everything was used.
It seems overly strict to me, hastily written when ChatGPT became popular perhaps.
Pretty soon most students are going to be say "Hey Siri, help me with my homework it's about X" and get an AI answer - are they all academically dishonest?
Kids need to learn how to think and have their own ideas, then as adults if they want to give in to the mediocrity of offloading their thinking to machines they'll have that chance.
AI is externalized assistance. Used one way, it can be a guide that helps a individual learn. Used differently, it's no different than asking someone else to do your work for you.
The issue here is academic honesty, not necessarily the definition of "AI". Should a student using Grammarly submit all drafts of their work and cite the changes they didn't make? Should students receiving external help in the form of parents and tutors cite that assistance?
I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing in an age when ubiquitous search and the internet democratize access to information resources. It's trivial to duplicate documents today, and It's no more of a burden to students to disclose how they are writing.
When I was growing up, teachers knew families who didn't have a home library or had only one car and didn't live near the library were at a disadvantage, so research periods were granted during class. Essays were written and turned in during class periods, and sudden changes to handwriting or style were easy to catch.
Today, the challenges are different, so it seems fair to change the requirements and criteria in response. I've advised friends in education to try assigning AI generated papers with citations as tests and ask students to correct them and expand them from sources.
Asking Siri whether information matches a particular source still isn't possible, and if you're going to have to go through the effort of compiling a bunch of sources for RAG, I think any student equipped to do that would also find it reasonably more efficient to simply do the work directly.
It's all meaningless anyways. What's the difference in me asking ChatGPT something and using the answer, and using some website as reference when the website itself could have used AI without me even knowing.
I do think that could be academic dishonesty depending on what came out of ChatGPT and how it was used. But it depends.
Let's also be perfectly clear that "Can you help me with homework about X" is probably not the question actually being asked. We know that these questions are just being pasted in verbatim. That is absolutely academic dishonesty.
This case is a little different. But let's not pretend that teachers in many subjects areny being taken advantage of and screwed over by these tools and students willing to use them. I'm sure they are all frustrated and willing to jump the gun against the slightest sign of this sort of thing. Tragedy of the commons situation, it's going to ruin academic culture in the US imo if there aren't extremely strict rules laid down and quickly.
>Pretty soon most students are going to be say "Hey Siri, help me with my homework it's about X" and get an AI answer - are they all academically dishonest?
I mean, it doesn't matter in the long run since academia will be as entirely AI driven as education soon enough, and the entire concept of "academic integrity" will be nothing but a quaint atavism from the days when the human in the loop was actually relevant, but yes.
This is such a myopic view. The average smartphone user may not immediately understand why increasingly locked down and user hostile devices are bad, but it does not negate the fact they are.
WordPress 3.7, which introduced automatic updates, received security backports all the way to 3.7.41. From 2013 to 2022. 4.1 and above are all still receiving them.
Doesn't WordPress officially only support the two latest minor version release though ? I can't find an official source at the moment but a quick googling seems to confirm that.
> The only current officially supported version is the last major release of WordPress. Previous major releases before this may or may not get security updates as serious exploits are discovered.
> …
> Security updates will be backported to older releases when possible, but there are no guarantee and no timeframe for older releases. There are no fixed period of support nor Long Term Support (LTS) version such as Ubuntu’s. None of these are safe to use, except the latest series, which is actively maintained.
Sadly Apple picked neither option. 3rd party apps cannot meaningfully interact with Spaces for example, even basic things like moving windows between spaces or adjusting the animation speed so it's not nauseating on ultrawides.
> even basic things like moving windows between spaces
I don't really use spaces but I've got "Displays have seperate spaces" turned on and Rectangle Pro has "Next Display" and "Previous Display" which moves the foreground app to, unsurprisingly, the next and previous display (which seems to be a space).
Are you after something like "move this window to space Y" rather than just "next space"?
You hit a keyboard shortcut, you get to the new space with 0 animation/transition. It can work with SIP on but only on macOS older than 10.14.
They mention here this is due to some changes they make to the Dock https://totalspaces.binaryage.com/sip-details I'm not sure if the only part I care about (instant Spaces switching) would continue to work without that / if you turn SIP back on. I haven't tried.
32, late diagnosed autistic. This is how I got into software development back in the day. Opera circa 2007 had a feature where viewing a page's source also let you edit it and update the page live. Neither Firefox or Chrome today have the feature as it existed in Opera. The inspector we have today is probably better overall though.
The first project I ever completed and shared with others was a userstyle that replaced a forum's ugly dithered gif gradients with much more modern pngs (`linear-gradient` didn't exist yet).
I run this on my old Eee PC 900a from 2008. The SSD was upgraded from the stock 16GB to a massive 128GB, and the ram doubled from 1GB to 2GB.
I have most of Adobe CS6 installed along with Office 2010, the final releases of both packages that ran on XP. I realised to my horror, these are also the then-current versions that I used whilst I was at university. I wrote my dissertation in Word 2010 and some of the graphics were made in Fireworks CS6.
This was the only XP ISO I found that easily booted on the device too. I'm not sure what was added to it, but the final retail ISOs wouldn't boot into setup. I think I have the OEM CD somewhere, but I don't have any optical devices that can read it.
If the battery held charge better, I could see myself bringing it to conferences. Despite what Jobs said, I love netbooks and can type reasonably well on them.
It stands in stark contrast with my old iPad 2, which is more or less marooned on iOS 9. It can't be downgraded, and even if it could be, finding IPAs from the era is a nightmare.
Open source? Would love to see a production Livewire app, especially since it's using v3 with AlpineJS.
PHP does indeed have good support for types now. Laravel as a framework generally eschews them, but it's flexible enough to make it developer preference really.
There are more screenshots of the note in the replies, but none with the complete links to the articles.