It's interesting that this has gone under the radar: OpenAI began adopting a constitutional approach to alignment in late 2024, updated last week. Their "deliberative alignment" specs tell the model to treat a list of rules deontologically and deliberate how they apply to particular examples.

I used the DeepSeek R1 reasoning model to prepare for a new course proposal. These screenshots show with and without the "DeepThink" option turned on--strikingly different. R1 does a lot more synthesis and offers clearer suggestions. It also accepts pdf files, o1 doesn't. Crazy this is open source.

What worked so well in this Nigerian experiment with using AI to boost literacy is how carefully each step is overseen by actual teachers. Perhaps the "deskilling" we see in other studies (students losing skills because of too much assistance) is bad strategy. blogs.worldbank.org/en/education...

Prompt engineering with o1:

Interesting to compare this o1 strategy with the CLEAR or RFTC framework (role format task constraints)

I currently find myself relying less on “role” and more on “context dump”

here's the article's summary of what o3 seems to be doing on the backend

This is one of the most elegant definitions of LLMs I’ve seen.

(from this post explaining the new o3 model and the ARC benchmark: arcprize.org/blog/oai-o3-...)

I'm shopping for broccoli sprout seeds on amazon and the "most helpful review" is 100% AI-generated. It's hard for me to read because half the words are completely pointless--but apparently it's helpful to others! 🤷‍♂️

My program is collecting data on this (through surveys) and it somewhat tracks. A small percentage of students are definitely “anti-AI”.

Most students, OTOH, say they’re uncomfortable with faculty using AI to evaluate their work, but they’re comfortable with AI in ed otherwise.

I love seeing health gurus compete like this