News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.
To be worth using, a detector needs not only (A) not get very many false positives, but also (B) get…
Everything you say is true, but what is the alternative? I don’t think people are advocating a return to in-class…
The discussion here assumes an institutional context where returning to supervised in-person assessment is at least theoretically feasible, a reasonable…
Cyber security professional here -reliably determining when a computational artifact (file, etc.) was created is *hard*. This is sorta why…
Agreed with the other commentator. It is extremely unlikely that Pangram’s success is due to its cheating by reading metadata.
I see this question as a bit naïve. There is metadata on every document created by a modern word processor…
There’s a simple way to test. Open a pre-2022 essay and copy-and-paste it into a new file.
MOVING TO FRONT FROM MAY 23–SEE UPDATE
This is my reply to critics for a forthcoming symposium issue of Law & Philosophy on my 2007 book Naturalizing Jurisprudence. The critics are: Julie Dickson (Oxford), Michael Steven Green (William & Mary), and Mark Greenberg (UCLA).
UPDATE: The papers to which I reply by Green and Greenberg are now available on-line. Unfortunately, it does not yet appear Dickson's is available on-line.
Leave a Reply