AI is not inevitable. Nothing in human societies is inevitable because we design them. Healthcare can be free for the public. Books can be bought instead of bombs. Universities can be free for students, and they can even receive a stipend to live off. Don't let companies dictate the future.
Read more in section 3.2 here https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17065099
@olivia Olivia, what would it mean for me to “refuse adoption” in universities when it is students who are the drivers for my courses and they are widely using AI in ways that are already forbidden?
I feel like the “resistance” and critique of inevitability talk isn’t quite connecting with my reality on the ground
I glanced at your work on "Science communication as collective intelligence".
I think that we need to redesign university courses so that learning is communal for the solution of a specific goal.
I think though that Olivia's points are complementary to that goal. Universities should resist AI adoption as imposed by external economic forces.
@apostolis @olivia I’ve have already redesigned both my assessments and my teaching in response to students’ AI use, but that kind of adaptation feels like it conceptually falls more into “inevitability” than “resist”
right now, what’s most valuable to me personally (given the starting point that every single student in my courses has somehow used AI, and a good proportion uses it *a lot*) is advice from other academics on how exactly they are trying to change what they do in response.
telling me “I can resist” doesn’t feel helpful in that way
@UlrikeHahn @apostolis @olivia I think you’re conflating your agency with that of your students.
The students are people that have agency and can decide not to use AI.
You just have to design your course in such a way as to penalize them for lack of knowledge stemming from their reliance on AI.
For example, verbal pop quizzes are a good way to humble them live when they fail to understand the topic as they would with an AI doing their thinking.
@harryprayiv @apostolis @olivia
where I teach, “humble them live” is not something that would be considered an appropriate teaching device in the year 2026, nor do I think it’s helpful or productive.
I also don’t think I’m conflating my agency and that of my students: my whole point was that me wishing to “resist” AI in my context runs up against the agency of others:
I don’t use AI personally, but I am experiencing significant disruption, and there’s no easy path to addressing that disruption precisely because it rests on the independent choices of other people.
@UlrikeHahn @apostolis @olivia It’s not appropriate to randomly ask a student a question about the material?
I’m calling bullshit on that one.
Perhaps I characterized it too wildly for you to grasp that that’s what I’m proposing?
@UlrikeHahn @apostolis @olivia Hilariously backwards! I’d quit instantly if I couldn’t actually test my students’ knowledge.
Sorry to hear that. Somehow, I don’t think AI is the biggest problem with the curriculum where you teach. Good luck!
@harryprayiv @apostolis @olivia it’s not about curriculum, it’s about appropriate modes of interaction and putting students down in front of others is not one of them
I’m proud to work where I do - it’s a world class department in terms of research in an institution that was founded 200 years ago with the mission statement of providing education “for the working man”
@harryprayiv @apostolis @olivia glad we got that out of the way ;-)
the bigger question is why would calling on students in a lecture stop them using AI to generate assessed work (which is already forbidden)?
I’m pretty sure the problem there is not that students aren’t aware that they don’t themselves know the answer or fully understand the material.
@UlrikeHahn @apostolis @olivia
Honored to continue this conversation then. It’s Interesting! 🤗
I have to preface this with the fact that I am an LLM user but…..
I am starting DESPISE the sycophantic info it gives me.
I triple/quadruple check EVERYTHING; innately distrust its output. I want explanations.
I’m not sure how to train that into students but it has helped me a lot among the legions of “engineers” that do agentic, hands-free coding.
@UlrikeHahn @apostolis @olivia Let me further this by perhaps brainstorming ways to engage students in the classroom that don’t induce an ego-death but cause their currently accepted patterns to shift under the weight of truth.
Here’s a talk so intellectually captivating, it makes one want to resist the thought of surrendering the joy of discovering the universe’s deepest truths to an AI.
https://corecursive.com/021-gods-programming-language-with-philip-wadler/
#### **Does God Code in Haskell?** Professor and accomplished programming language researcher Philip Wadler believes that typed lambda calculus was discovered not invented -- part of the underpinnings of the universe itself. As a result, functional programming languages are more fundamental and deeply justified than their alternatives. We talk about this principle, which has guided his career. Phil takes us through the history of computer science from Turing to Alonzo Church. Eventually we get to what the movie Independence Day got wrong and what language a theoretical creator deity would program in.
@UlrikeHahn @apostolis @olivia and yes “humble them live” was the effect but it wouldn’t come off that way in person if done right. You could also say, give them a reason to be proud of knowing the material live if you wanted a less cynical spin.
As a Dad, the hypothesis I’m presenting is that my child (is great and learns well but I have noticed that she) learns even better when there’s another child next to her, showing her that it CAN be done.
Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ
Ulrike Hahn
Apostolis
harryprayiv