I didn't scour the text but one thing I didn't see as an explanatory consideration in the paper is that the larger companies they talk about having larger adoption are also much more likely to have reasonably robust controls (and consequences) that prevent mixing personal/corporate use of AI tooling. That's my world.
On the other hand my girlfriend is a teacher and for the past year ChatGPT has allowed her to augment her lesson plans with slides/games/etc that have had a very positive effect on student engagement. She also uses it to help with analysis of testing data against her lesson plans and state standards to find places to shore things up as the year progresses. She runs the english language learning department in her school and also uses it to help ensure that there is representation in her materials for the huge mix of cultural backgrounds of her students.
It's truly helped her immensely and it's all been on her personal account. The district has no program or budget to guide or support teachers and admin on using these tools in education.
Schools for the poorer segments of society keep adding more and more technology, eroding the analytical skills of their students and staff. But the shiny things keep the poorer parents and mediocre teachers happy while keeping down cost per lesson per child. This keeps the administrators happy.
Meanwhile ultra-expensive elite private schools for the children of the Zuckerbergs, Al Sauds, Al Nahyans, where the teachers are Ivy and Oxbridge graduates emphasise tradition, classical studies and analytical skills while relegating technology to a minor role
As always the children of the rich and powerful get bespoke education... You could call it elegant education for a more civilized age...
Prior to her current role my gf spent about a decade as the head of a very elite private elementary school for about ten years (she's been in education for 35 years now). Certainly ten figure families represented in the student body. They had all of the resources they could ask for and the school did very well on paper. However, the attitude of the students was qualitatively different (and in her opinion much worse) than those of her current students.
It's fun to imagine a collection of rock star educators huddled around every child just constantly feeding their intellectual curiosity, but the reality is most of them are not hungry. And their parents aren't present. They have a comfortable existence of inconsequentiality, and that robs something from a human.
This is a stupid take. We aren't talking about technology for the students, it is augmenting what a teacher can do.
My wife is a elementary teacher at a school and uses Claude to do things like help classify and catalog books in a classroom she was taking over.
This technology helps the teachers have the hands on time with the kids. Helps craft lessons that specifically address areas that need development. It is like giving a teacher a small support team. It literally helps close the gap you are lamenting.
Would it kill these OpenAI guys to learn how to write a white paper? Google's DeepMind did better with their AGI to ASI, though I have qualms on their execution.
Whenever I see these Frontier Labs "publish a paper" on ArXiv.org the phrase Esse Quam Videri strides past my mind—is this genuine progress or merely a marketing metric for their stakeholders?
When I say “how” I mean like how u/glouwbug mentioned: Formatting. But more so Structure.
When I read artifacts by Frontier Labs I notice a trend towards deteriorating lexicographic architecture. Like how a textbook or larger tomb is constructed for the reader to navigate.
Instead, now I see continuous monotonic text. It’s as if the author expects us to chuck the artifact into an LLM in order for it to inform us of meaning.
Purely anecdotally, over the last few weeks I've noticed a significant uptick in articles trying to convince me how awesome AI is doing. And that's from a pretty high baseline of articles that were already telling me how I should really appreciate how awesome AI is.
It's almost as though there's some worry that the wheels are going to come off before the right people are able to cash out.
This reads like some crypto or NFT commodity white paper, i.e. like an ad that says you need to use this now, and more, so that you'll figure out what it's good for.
A difference is that in those white papers they usually argue that their solution is more perfect in some sense than some more adopted alternative, here they instead claim that their commercial offering is "general purpose".
On the other hand my girlfriend is a teacher and for the past year ChatGPT has allowed her to augment her lesson plans with slides/games/etc that have had a very positive effect on student engagement. She also uses it to help with analysis of testing data against her lesson plans and state standards to find places to shore things up as the year progresses. She runs the english language learning department in her school and also uses it to help ensure that there is representation in her materials for the huge mix of cultural backgrounds of her students.
It's truly helped her immensely and it's all been on her personal account. The district has no program or budget to guide or support teachers and admin on using these tools in education.
Schools for the poorer segments of society keep adding more and more technology, eroding the analytical skills of their students and staff. But the shiny things keep the poorer parents and mediocre teachers happy while keeping down cost per lesson per child. This keeps the administrators happy.
Meanwhile ultra-expensive elite private schools for the children of the Zuckerbergs, Al Sauds, Al Nahyans, where the teachers are Ivy and Oxbridge graduates emphasise tradition, classical studies and analytical skills while relegating technology to a minor role
As always the children of the rich and powerful get bespoke education... You could call it elegant education for a more civilized age...
Prior to her current role my gf spent about a decade as the head of a very elite private elementary school for about ten years (she's been in education for 35 years now). Certainly ten figure families represented in the student body. They had all of the resources they could ask for and the school did very well on paper. However, the attitude of the students was qualitatively different (and in her opinion much worse) than those of her current students.
It's fun to imagine a collection of rock star educators huddled around every child just constantly feeding their intellectual curiosity, but the reality is most of them are not hungry. And their parents aren't present. They have a comfortable existence of inconsequentiality, and that robs something from a human.
My wife is a elementary teacher at a school and uses Claude to do things like help classify and catalog books in a classroom she was taking over.
This technology helps the teachers have the hands on time with the kids. Helps craft lessons that specifically address areas that need development. It is like giving a teacher a small support team. It literally helps close the gap you are lamenting.
The poor get machine manufactured education and these days AI generated quasi-educational slop.
As always the children of the rich and powerful get bespoke education... You could call it elegant education for a more civilized age...
Whenever I see these Frontier Labs "publish a paper" on ArXiv.org the phrase Esse Quam Videri strides past my mind—is this genuine progress or merely a marketing metric for their stakeholders?
When I read artifacts by Frontier Labs I notice a trend towards deteriorating lexicographic architecture. Like how a textbook or larger tomb is constructed for the reader to navigate.
Instead, now I see continuous monotonic text. It’s as if the author expects us to chuck the artifact into an LLM in order for it to inform us of meaning.
That and all the figures were at the bottom which was kind of annoying.
Seriously, the best blog post on this subject has to be Ludicity: https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/ai-mania-is-eviscerating-glo...
It's almost as though there's some worry that the wheels are going to come off before the right people are able to cash out.
A difference is that in those white papers they usually argue that their solution is more perfect in some sense than some more adopted alternative, here they instead claim that their commercial offering is "general purpose".
Answer: Yes.