#this is a superb article on logical and clear-eyed pedagogy that refuses to cede 'normal' to ai but also dispenses with

[librarycards]

The narrative surrounding AI is that people will be “left behind” unless they adopt it ASAP. How is AI going to revolutionize education? How is it going to transform agriculture? How is it going to make logistics a million times smarter? Almost every sector is being faced with the proposition that they should jump on the AI train or risk getting left behind.

To my frustration, rather than having concerted, critical, and honest conversations around who benefits from this technology—and why and how—we’ve been sold the idea that it’s inevitable, and we better figure out how to make use of it, to deal with it as best we can.

I could see some approaches to AI being more punitive, like “I will do this and this if you use AI” [...] [but] I really wanted to approach my students as empowered agents of their own learning and to express to them, in the best way that I could at the time, what my reservations are. Not just with the tool in a technical sense and how it, as many people have confirmed, is much more like a stochastic parrot than it is something that learns or that is cognitive.

Beyond that, there is the larger “assemblage” of AI that enables these systems to run in the first place. Since I’m an environmental studies professor, it became clear that a lot of those pieces were an entire material world of energy, water, and other resources; of labor undervalued and exploited. And there’s the racialized and encoded assumptions that emanate through the texts upon which these chatbots are trained.