Yet you keep talking...

Be troubled! But "professor of ethics" is not a person who's ethically better than ordinary people, as my friends can tell you

I'm actually trying to run a series at UVa about "how to use LLMs for research" so I'm not AGAINST this stuff! Just want to learn how to use it "mindfully" in a way that amplifies human deliberation & agency, in whatever ways delib & agency are required (in academia, many ways).

If this is a serious question--and because I'm feeling weirdly hopeful this AM, I'll take it as such--I would say contest your claim that "the NYT is hostile to progressives" is not my impression. IMHO, you have to be very bubbled to believe that. Engage others, get out of your bubble. Thx.

If your job makes you use chat GPT, that's one thing--I can imagine plenty of uses for it that are useful, so long as you don't use it to replace your own judgment & thinking. But I worry that such replacement is just what happens sometimes. And as you know, in college that's a disaster.

I simply want to resist the inevitability argument about chat GPT replacing student "work" (which must be their own) because "everyone's doing it" or something like that. I get annoyed when people seem to say "we can't stop this" or "there's no resisting it".

When they were forced not to endorse anyone in 24 and they didn't quit, I knew they'd be happy to be his little Quislings

"Everyone was doing it" is not the critical response she seems to think it is. NYT's point wasn't that SC was unusual, but that it was representative.