• Sabre363
    link
    fedilink
    English
    665 months ago

    Easily by thwarted by simply proofreading your shit before you submit it

      • @MalditoBarbudo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        215 months ago

        I wouldn’t call “professional cheaters” to the students that carefully proofread the output. People using chatgpt and proofreading content and bibliography later are using it as a tool, like any other (Wikipedia, related papers…), so they are not cheating. This hack is intended for the real cheaters, the ones that feed chatgpt with the assignment and return whatever hallucination it gives to you without checking anything else.

    • @abbadon420@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      225 months ago

      But that’s fine than. That shows that you at least know enough about the topic to realise that those topics should not belong there. Otherwise you could proofread and see nothing wrong with the references

      • Sabre363
        link
        fedilink
        English
        55 months ago

        I’ve worked as tutor, I know those little idiots ain’t proofing a got-damn thing

    • @xantoxis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      60
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Is it? If ChatGPT wrote your paper, why would citations of the work of Frankie Hawkes raise any red flags unless you happened to see this specific tweet? You’d just see ChatGPT filled in some research by someone you hadn’t heard of. Whatever, turn it in. Proofreading anything you turn in is obviously a good idea, but it’s not going to reveal that you fell into a trap here.

      If you went so far as to learn who Frankie Hawkes is supposed to be, you’d probably find out he’s irrelevant to this course of study and doesn’t have any citeable works on the subject. But then, if you were doing that work, you aren’t using ChatGPT in the first place. And that goes well beyond “proofreading”.