The letter is here, and is still accepting signatures. I quite agree that it is outrageous the extent to which private employers (and even some universities) are willing to sanction lawful political speech by students, and am sympathetic to the ultimate recommendations (but less sympathetic to other parts of the letter). But law professor readers should take a look and decide for themselves.
Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog
News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.
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.
To be worth using, a detector needs not only (A) not get very many false positives, but also (B) get…