😬😬😬

lol.

(p.s. Yes. I used Claude to help me craft this thread. And I could write a whole nother thread about that process.)

They defend the unique value of historical (and humanistic) methods. They offer concrete guidance on how educators can navigate the world as it is. Not too bad imo. And fwiw, as someone in public interest tech, we could stand to have more folks trained w/ those skills in our sector. 9/9

Are these principles perfect? No. Do they sidestep critical questions about corporate power, environmental costs, and surveillance capitalism. Yes. (Tho tbh it's hard to imagine any list ready to meet this moment that everyone would deem "perfect.") 8/

This sums it up for me: "Students ... already rely on genAI tools and will continue to do so. Some ... have chosen to reject genAI for its ethical, environmental, and economic consequences, but ignoring it will neither halt its spread nor shield our discipline and students from its reach." 7/

Fwiw from my POV, some activities need to ban AI in order to cultivate certain skills and methods, while others should strategically encourage use w/in clear parameters. The key is intentionality. We need to help students learn when, where, how, and why AI can be useful, and when it's a problem. 6/