learntoquestion ltq discussions

AI operates based on the input provided. It is a mirror that reflects only what we want to see, rather than what we need to confront. AI doesn’t yet have the capacity to mimic human emotions in a conversation accurately. Ai will give you responses generated from the internet combined with it's own programming.

Originally posted by starfruit_24 on May 29, 2025 10:40

One of the primary things my group talked about was whether AI has the potential to eliminate education disparities. We concluded that there really isn’t a good way to prevent disparities in education, even with AI. Even besides regulating usage, parts of AI will likely always be behind a paywall, so it may not even come down to who uses AI, but who has access to better AI. Another thing we discussed was whether higher education and education as a whole will become obsolete. I think that if you could learn the same things at a lower cost from a computer than from a human, eventually education in the way we know it now will eventually become obsolete. Teaching becoming obsolete is supported by the article “Everyone’s Using AI To Cheat at School. That’s a Good Thing.”, which notes that “These models are such great cheating aids because they are also such great teachers. Often they are better than the human teachers we put before our kids, and they are far cheaper at that” (Crowen). Going even further into that, rather than human connection becoming of higher value,I think the workforce has the potential to become obsolete, because once again if AI can do it cheaper, longer and faster, why have humans involved? There are definitely acceptios at the moment, since AI hasn’t been developed to its full capability yet, but 20 years from now this may no longer be the case. Teachers who use AI should face the same consequences as students, they are supposed to set the standard afterall. I think it would be hugely hypocritical for teachers to expect their students to do one thing but do something totally different themselves. Outside of hypocrisy, I think there’s no reason for students to pay to be in a place where their lectures are completely computer generated. If AI is being used as a tool, I think it could be acceptable, but teachers should not use AI to generate full lectures, just as students should not use AI to generate full projects. In terms of academic honesty, we thought that AI usage wasn’t even useful across all fields. For something like an algebra class AI may be able to accurately and clearly provide correct solutions, but for a high level chemistry class, AI can’t currently perform on the same level as humans. In cases like this, using AI would ultimately only be to the detriment of the student, so can this really be considered academic dishonesty? Yes students can try, but currently AI doesn’t have the capability to help them succeed at any topic they can dream of.

Hey @starfruit_24! I really enjoyed reading your response, and I specifically wanted to emphasize your central points. I agree that because the access to AI is far more cheaper than human resources, people might feel more prone to using it as a cheating tool. Additionally, it sort of eliminates the moraliity of it because in most cases, users feel cheated from or even betrayed by the constituitions that are supposed to support us, rather not play agaisnt us. I also think you did a good job on giving accountability to those who explicitly use AI to create entire projects, because it takes away from the entire point of a project. I like that you provide both an optimistic and ¨pessimistic¨ view on AI in the future, because although free AI can do so little, you also use it as an opportunity to warn others about the rise of AI. Great job!