Also, the ham bands as a whole cannot be used for profit-motives or any financial gain. People often forget this rule. Not to mention the (kind of absurd, IMO) rule against any form of encryption.
In the US, there certainly is. The rule doesn't mention encryption specifically, it just prohibits "encoding for the purpose of obscuring meaning". The intent is what matters not the method.
Another issue is people were “testing” them using an RTLSDR which very easily gets overloaded and shows harmonics where there are none. Even my local FM station shows up on my SDR at frequencies I know they’re not actually transmitting on.
Hmmm I don’t believe so? Zen is at least portrayed in its conclusion as a true, autobiographical story (with obviously dollops of philosophical musings).
I tried so damn hard to beat the game...but in the end, I needed the Invisiclues guide. I was also 9 years old, but I got pretty far (missed the vector plotter puzzle and the end one with Marvin). Even so, it's one of my more proud achievements. :)
Exactly the same game. All of Infocom's text adventures ran under a bytecode interpreter, with the bytecode being shared across all platforms that a game was released on. There are a number of modern interpreters for that format, too; you don't need to emulate an Apple II to play those games (unless you really want to, of course).
> Does AI cheating in school matter much? The primary party that loses out from the cheating is the cheater because they will fail to learn
Sure, I suppose. But the secondary effect is that others with the same Uni degree now have their degree valued less in the eyes of whomever hires the cheater and they fail to do their job right.
Or, much worse, the cheater gets someone hurt or killed. Tech can kill people--just ask Boeing (guess who has large hiring events at my Uni!).
> Universities will not confirm or deny if a particular party got a degree
Hmm. I've had several jobs in the past which, as a contingency of being hired, must show proof of a Uni degree via official transcripts. Mine charges $12 for the privilege of printing out your record on "official paper", stamping it, and mailing it to your presumptive employer (or grad school) on demand.
> Or, much worse, the cheater gets someone hurt or killed. Tech can kill people--just ask Boeing (guess who has large hiring events at my Uni!).
Do you think cheating was a major factor there? Or has Boeing just been prioritizing things like cost over other considerations?
For life critical engineering roles it would be entirely reasonable to test candidates. If an org like Boeing fails to do so, it has to be because they just don't prioritize the candidate's capability.
Of course someone could cheat some but otherwise study and still pass the test, but I think those candidates will already be pretty job performance indistinguishable from people who didn't cheat. A degree only means so much at best.
> I've had several jobs in the past which, as a contingency of being hired, must show proof of a Uni degree via official transcripts.
I'm aware of that practice, though I've never experienced it first hand and you're only the second person who has told me that they've experienced it. In any case, it's easily faked if you're willing to be bold about it, particularly where you've enrolled previously (even briefly) -- get a transcript sent to yourself, make a duplicate that says what you want, send that in. Even if your forgery is not very good it is extremely unlikely to get a careful inspection because faked credentials are not currently recognized to be a widespread problem.
In practice this kind of validation is rare, so even if you're unwilling to go the master-forger route you're just limited somewhat in your hiring pool.
Somewhat ironically, hiring hoops seem to be more common for lower tier position. If your fake degrees aren't working, fake some more and apply as CEO. :D
Even in court I've had difficulty dealing with a party faking their credentials via bare assertion.
> > Cheating is widespread because there are people in those courses who aren't interested in the material
This is only part of the issue, IMO. Students (especially CS/Engineering students) are usually overloaded with work.
I've caught otherwise motivated students cheating simply because they're stressed to perform and didn't want to fail--especially since they've usually gotten pretty far in their coursework once they get to me--and the stress got the better of them.
No excuses for them (and I fail cheating/plagarism along with my Uni policy) but lack of interest isn't always the motivating factor.
> I just think assessments should be more holistic
I'm with you on this, but aside from the time issue which I brought up in a previous response, this has been attempted at Uni before. In the 1960s, UCSC attempted to eliminate all grading and assessments and had professors write a narrative about their students. It worked from a knowledge perspective, but was absolutely lambasted in the wider media and academic circles.
Uni CS lecturer here: It's not the writing itself that is important, it's the ability to communicate ideas and express one's own thoughts.
I use writing on exams as a way to determine what the student actually knows about a particular thing. It's not a perfect metric by any stretch, but it's one of the few that we have to test knowledge of a subject (theoretical knowledge) versus a practical demonstration (project or code).
Why not use more oral exams? It'd be quite difficult for me to cheat on an algorithms examination if you and I were talking back and forth in real time. I understand time is probably a factor, but I still think such assessments could be conducted. I had foreign-language assessments and musical assessments conducted in such a manner at the university level.
Not to mention, when those students apply for many of the jobs out there, they might have gained some useful skills for interviewing, conversing with team members, etc..
I'm not opposed to some writing, but it seems like our education system believes it to be the only medium that matters.
> Why not use more oral exams? ... I understand time is probably a factor
We do this, actually. Usually in the form of project demos when students complete a longer project.
But also consider: I have ~200-250 students a semester. Even at 10 minutes a student per semester (and really...how much can I learn about a student in 10 minutes??) that's a whole lot of hours.
I also don't get paid hourly. I also don't get paid a lot. Teaching isn't exactly a high-paying job in the state Uni system.
reply