In the article, The Exploited Labor Behind Artificial Intelligence sheds light on the hidden labor that is involved in the development of artificial intelligence (AI). The article explores the labor practices of the global tech industry and highlights the exploitative conditions that many workers face.

The article argues that AI technologies rely on a complex network of human labor, including data labeling, programming, and algorithm development. However, many of the workers who perform these tasks are underpaid, overworked, and subjected to poor working conditions. Which honestly, seems to be nothing new when fast paced systems (or jobs) like these are created. The exploitation of these workers is enabled by the global supply chains and outsourcing practices of the tech industry, which prioritize cost-cutting and profit-making over workers’ rights and welfare.

After the readings, I can definitely say that this is giving Apple, Fashion Nova, and many other big companies that exploit their workers. Now we can officially add AI to that mix. There definitely needs to be greater attention and a continued conversation on this arising issue that sees no end in sight. We need all the attention we can get for human rights and the working conditions of the labor force that underpins the development of AI technologies. Because this will only continue and potentially get worse. But to be honest just like many other bigger companies the only end to this issue is bringing more awareness and protests and even stake-holding approach to involve government, industries, and organizations to help promote ethical and sustainable practices in the tech industry as well as in other industries.

The quote goes, if you can’t beat them, join them. This is us (educators and everyone else against AI systems) with our silent war of this ongoing funny business. But ironically now, we need to get down to business and discuss this arrising issue.

In the article, How Should Schools Respond to ChatGPT by Katherine Schulten, she gives a special shoutout to Kevin Roose. He argues that schools should consider the technology (ChatGPT) as a teaching aid. Obviously, less like the enemy. While it can be hard to find that in-between balance once you already hate something, Roose has a point. AI systems can be a good tool to give feedback and even teaching tools for teachers to use in their classroom. A teacher can demonstrate how a generic and boring essay is suppose too look like. Or better yet, how students should write their essays for state tests. I can see that being a semi positive approach. New York has blocked access for students to be able to use ChatGPT but that won’t stop them from using it when they are home, unfortunately.

In Katherine Schulten’s other article with the New York Times, Lesson Plan: Teaching and Learning in the Era of ChatGPT she further dives in just how this tool can be used in the classroom. She shares how to play with the tool, giving it a prompt, then having the students analyze it. Open the discussion in the classroom on the overall prompt, opinions, and thoughts. While like I mentioned before, that can be helpful. I think this can actually be really helpful in a school environment. Within the state and all the state testing, it’s almost feels like their is that pressure to get rid of the students voice in order to generate more essays that are “academically correct.” This tool can be helpful to aid students on writing those essays for their SAT’s and so on and so forth.

In my opinion, if we approach ChatGPT for what it is, which is basic. Maybe students won’t be as intrigued or maybe they will be. But with new systems vast approaching, if you can’t beat them, might as well join them.

I don’t think voice in writing is found until it is written. Every article, book, or blog you read all come from a distinct voice, one that’s unique. In my own collection of books, I can tell apart them many different voices from different authors. I can instantly tell the difference between an author like Colleen Hoover (who sometimes drives me crazy with her writing) as compared to an author like Sylvia Path. And honestly, at this point or even early on, if you had to make me guess who wrote what, I would be able to tell. Voice is kind of what sets all writers apart. Because yes, there are a gazillion writers in the world, but there are not gazillion of the same voices. And I think that already comes naturally, not something that needs much thought.

“Based on 20 checked articles, Originality was able to identify GPT-3 and GPT-3.5 content with almost 100% accuracy. When taking ChatGPT-generated content, accuracy drops to 90% at its lowest detection rate.”

This is important, mainly for students. English (and I hate to say it) it’s the most hated subject for many children in their academic career. I hear it all the time. ChatGPT is the leading gateway for students to avoid their hate and find an easy route. But if Originality can detect, this is helpful. Kids aren’t too interested in finding their voice in writing when they are younger. They care about getting a decent grade and getting the assignment over with. And to be honest, it’s kind of hard to change that mindset. But I do believe that the more you do something, the more you do tend to like it, or at least not hate it as much anymore. I speak from experience with green tea. Kids are going to do whatever it takes and they will find whatever they can use to get out of doing “hard work” thus, this makes it hard for educators or even bosses. But AI lacks that human voice, the most primal part to writing and even reading. Maybe you can detect it, or maybe you can’t but at least a tool like Originality was created in order to compact the loss of original writers in entirely.

It’s hard to come with a conclusion whether or not AI systems are a friend or foe for us. But I do believe that there are more cons than pros. Especially in the education field, and many jobs that survive and utilize technology on the day to day basis. In my last blog post, it’s clear that I have some strong view points on AI replacing humans in jobs. But it can also replace human writers. It’s evident, that children will do and use whatever they have access to in order not to have to physically do any work themselves. It went from getting a friend to do a paper to now having AI write your paper. Yes, while I do agree with the article, “Free AI Writing Tools Can Write Essays In Minutes. What Does That Mean For Teachers?” I also don’t agree with it. Yes, teachers can structure assignments that AI writing models can’t mimic currently, but that doesn’t mean for long. In the other article, “5 Reasons Why AI Is A Threat To Writers,” they mention that AI has already reached human-level writing, and AI can write about virtually everything. So while yes, AI can’t mimic class assignments and responses to other students, that mainly means that AI can’t be used for in class assignments. What about outer class assignments? Like research papers? I feel like in an education environment, the only way to prevent children from not using the computer applications are by only doing in class assignments. So what does that mean for homework and other assignments with due dates? Yes, teachers can implement that using AI is a form of cheating, but kids still cheat regardless, and they will continue to do so, now it’s even easier than ever to cheat.

In the other article “Technology Makes Us More Human,” I see the points and argument that the author mentions. She argues that improvement through technology is how humanity most effectively makes progress. Also how software, globally, creates new opportunities to empower people at scale. She also states that technology is the only thing that makes us, us. Which to a degree, I do agree. But I also don’t. I feel like when the types of things are being created and utilized the only real way to go about it, is to see how they play out. Much how people had to watch it pan out when the internet was first created, and how we had to see how electric cars will play out. We can’t stop things from being created but we can see how they pan out and how we can utilize them in our day to day. I guess in a way, taking it with a grain of salt.

I’ve mentioned this previously, I didn’t know ChatGPT was a thing till I started this course. I thought everyone was still on their grammarly wave. I was wrong. The readings that were selected by Javon for this week were insightful, at least for me considering I knew nothing about ChatGPT. The future of this AI is scary, at least for me. I definitely feel like we are headed towards a new reality, except this time it’s a reality of the films we use to make. Alone we are having an issue of not enough jobs. The argument (which I disagree) is that immigrants are taking “our jobs.” I just feel that they are doing the jobs we don’t want, but that’s another post for another time. But now the question of whether ChatGPT can take over human jobs is drawing to attention. Now make that make sense. People in America are having this issue and argument that there are not enough jobs because of immigrants but we are creating a system that can take over and replace humans? Yes while it is unlikely as stated in the article that they can completely replace human workers, there is still some lead way for the system to take many jobs, it’s just not all of them. Yes AI systems are designed to assist with certain tasks, but they are not capable of replicating the full range of abilities and skills that humans possess. But that doesn’t mean they won’t ever be able to. If a system as such was already able to be created who knows what else can be done in order for an AI system like ChatGPT is able to do it all.

The article is counteractive in demonstrating that ChatGPT can and can not do in regards to what they can replace. But I don’t find that convincing. If we are already creating a space for AI systems to co-exist, it makes me wonder if we would continue to create a space where an AI system just completely replaces everything. ChatGPT is being utilized by many, its writing kids papers for school; it’s already holing a powerful stance when it comes to academics. It’s leading the way of what papers should look like and how they should be written. That already takes away some creativity. Even if it’s not creative writing, I feel that any paper you write does hold some creativity. Because you wrote it, you created it, you put your own voice in that writing. Everything we do produce and create does have a bit of that creative element to it, because it’s ours. CHATGPT could neva! But jokes aside, I do find it alarming for a system as such to exist and I think a system like this should be used with a grain of salt in order to give work by humans a purpose. Because the human touch is needed. If it’s not clear, I do have some strong views of ChatGPT; I am completely against it.

The two readings that I picked that were provided, went hand in hand. I feel like one gave the background clarity while the other was educating you on what to do with that background. The body that keeps the score reading went into detail how to get through the difficulties that arise from your traumatic past by revealing the psychology behind them. However that is not always easy, getting through your traumatic past if you are unaware that you are reacting in the first place. That’s where How to Help a Traumatized Child in the Classroom comes into play. It mentions how a child’s behavior is a result of chronic exposure to traumatic events beyond his or her control. With a minor degree in psychology, I have studied that many of our traumatic events that happen in our lives stay in our subconscious, and when things are kept there we are unaware we act and do things a certain way, because we don’t even know that we are doing them.

As an educator myself, I found how to help children in a the classroom reading to be very insightful, in other words in resonated with me more than the other. I liked how it brought points to discussion but also awareness. I am guilty of occasionally having to raise my voice every now and then. Because sometimes I am not going to lie, it seems to be the only way high school kids will listen. While I try to stir away from yelling and really getting to that point with my kids, I never thought how that could provoke any trauma they keep in. Classrooms should be a safe space for children of all ages, and I as an educator, it is my responsibility to do so. I definitely kept not of creating a calm environment and adapting classroom’s mindfulness. I am a big believer in energy transfer which is why I always try to remain calm and together when I am around anyone else. I know that energy is a big mood shifter, and when I keep my own self happy and calm, it transfers and is picked up by others. Because I also know when I am having a bad day, I can make someone else almost have a bad day too.

Being an educator is a hard job, and it often comes with many challenges. Especially when you have kids who don’t want to listen. But these readings were a reminder to keep my peace, protect my own energy, so I can also be everyone else’s peace as well. Trauma is an interesting thing, and the way it stays with us forever is an ongoing issue we will always have to work on. But as an educator, I can help be a positive light for my students.

Our previous Thursday class was very interesting as we dived into each others voice in writing in comparison to a computer system, Chat GPT. I find it to be very clear that while a computer system as such may be a cool demonstration of what a writing prompt can or should look like, (kind of one of those things where you see this is what you should or should not do) but at the end of the day, it is not authentic, not original, and not creative. It’s missing the most important part, the human, Without that human touch I feel as if though Chat GPT produced generic writing that maybe a more boring and traditional teacher would approve of. But with no personal touch or voice, if you use Chat GPT for one assignment or paper, you would have to keep using it because that would potentially be your “voice,” a computer.

Now diving into James McBride in preparation for his event on Thursday, I had a lot of interest when it came to reading and listening to the quarantine tapes. One thing that resonated most with me was when he said, “…I believe we have more in common than we are different.” In his book, Deacon King Kong McBride makes the cop in his story, the good man. As a Black author, I am sure he must have received some backlash from choosing to do so. I do agree with his statement, on why he chose to make the white cop a good man but it still does raise a question as to why the cop couldn’t be a bad guy to further tell the story that many Blacks do have to struggle and face. Because as we know, with a whole movement be centered towards the subject, seems like there is and never will be enough awareness for it. Because until the problem officially stops, we can’t stop making the conversation.

Questions for James McBride

1. Considering that you are a big advocate for for arts in school and without it robs children of their creativity, how do you feel about computer systems such as Chat GPT that write papers for students?
2. Why did you chose to make the white officer a good man instead of a bad man and create a positive outcome for the characters in the book?

Both the documentary and reading were both helpful and insightful to further dive into the subject of AI. Not sure if I have been living under a rock or something but being back in school for my second semester of graduate school, this is my first introduction of AI. I did have one student tell me one day that a system did write his paper, I was confused. With the lack of knowledge of these online tools, I had just assumed that the software had edited his paper for him to make it better. Little did I know.

I am not fully against computer systems. While there are more cons’ than pros’ of course, I do feel like in a way AI can benefit writers, if used correctly. But with everything in life, everything needs to be used with moderation. I like that in the reading there was a distinct message that compares what a creator and an artist is. This is important. While AI systems can be compared to ghost writers, AI still generates writing at a low bar. The artist/writer still needs to build and work on what was created. AI systems really can mostly push and help with any writers block one may have, and I feel like that’s what it mainly should be used for. Computer systems are trained to predict what comes next. And just like that YA author who was writing a fantasy novel and used AI, as we can predict, AI does not always have the best predictions itself of what should come next. The system should be used with a grain of salt, it may be helpful and it may inspire other ideas within yourself that was pushed.

I agree with HOLLYMAHOGANY, AI does loose that human touch. While it can be a great and helpful tool for writers and artists, it will still never be as creative as a human can be. In my opinion at least. While the tool can be there and used when needed, I don’t think it’s a system creators should primarily be fixated on using. It should be there as tool of recourse, not a tool for creativity.

Hi,

My name is Julie (although I usually prefer Jules, it’s what everyone pretty much calls me). This is my second semester of my graduate program here at Kean. And so far, not too shabby. I feel like I am right where I am suppose to be alongside with work and just life in general. Feeling pretty positive which is good because at least one thing is going right, right? Anyways, I’m 26 years old, I work at Passaic High School, I’m the youngest sibling of two, I have four pets, and I like to read and write. Which would make sense of my placement here I suppose. I’m also really big on film photography.

But yeah, I’m excited for this course and the things I will learn as I go.

So I think my final project might be actually done. I feel content with it; part of me wants to add more but also another part of me likes it the way it is. But I’m also a libra so I’m always very indecisive. I think now what’s left for me to do is the final project assessment and make sure that is completed for my portfolio submission with all my links.

I am excited to share and discuss in class tomorrow about my final project and share my collective and private work with everyone

xx Jules