Enter generative AI in general and ChatGPT in particular. If your idea of learning is scrolling through content and perhaps shuffling it around a little before submitting it back online for your credential, it must seem like a kind of liquid-metal coursework Terminator. Why *wouldn’t* it appeal?

I think back of all of it is credentialism, the idea that the degree and the GPA are the point, the insistence on the shortest path to both for market reasons; at the upper end university is a Student Experience and at the lower end it certifies you for data entry. This corrodes the desire to learn.

where do i remember seeing #Deloitte before...oh yes #TheTrevorProject and they also flirt with #SalesForce hmm sensitive data nearby would be oh so fun to "de-person-ize" and whatever might a for-profit company do with #CrisisLines conversations?
philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/deloitt...

If you're not calling out eugenics in AGI, you're a part of the problem.

"[The Deloitte report] included fictional papers coauthored by researchers who said they had never worked together."

"The Deloitte report contained false citations, pulled from made-up academic papers to draw conclusions for cost-effectiveness analyses, and cited real researchers on papers they hadn’t worked on, the Independent found."

And they're repping the Institute for Applied Psychometrics!

They also rely entirely on the Cattel-Horn-Carroll theory without engaging in the many criticisms that have been made of the CTC model. CTC and other psychometric instruments like it are historically rooted in eugenics. Everything leads back to eugenics in AGI! www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-...

If you're not calling out eugenics in AGI, you're a part of the problem.