"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
Okay so it looks like the block is the sum of the two blocks beneath it? Are we reading the ibstructions correctly? I guess -50 works for the bottom right but yeah the 840 one is nonsense.
EDIT: Dr. Bob figured it out, and you're going to hate it, the figures make sense if only the ENTIRE ROW is EQUAL TO the OTHER ROWS, the bricks touching means nothing and a brick's value is independent of the two immediately beneath it.
Yeah -50 would work on the right. They dont have below zero yet.
So there's no singular way to answer the middle row correctly on the right?
The figure on the right would be 450 = 350 + 100 = 200 + 100 + 150
I agree it's a dumb lesson, though.
Apparently not, as long as they total 450
I was reading it as always having to sum to the top block. So 640 would correct for the bottom layer and 500 for the middle layer.
Sorry German, but you can clearly see how this puzzle should work. Cornelsen also publishes the school books. So I agree with OP here. That looks stupid and wrong
I'm not seeing any pattern for 640 to 500 to 840
840=340+500=120+640+80
I'm going to admit that this is plausible but if it is the intention then it's an incredibly stupid and pointless exercise, because:
Then there is no point to a second layer at all and the bricks on the second layer have no relation to the two immediately beneath them.
That still doesn't explain where the 500 comes from, it really only makes sense if you split it into two separate pyramids that both add up to 840.
EDIT: No, actually, I think about it more and it kind of makes sense that each ROW equals the one below and that the bircks touching have no relation.
Was hat das Lehry gesagt?
Noch keine antwort, aber sie fühlt sich sonst direkt immer angegriffen
The question mark on right one is -50 if I understand correctly what they want from me.
You are totally right.
The students didnt met the numbers below zero :)
Maybe parents should come up with a good alternative and propose this to the school.
Already did. Talked to the teacher.
They already have books which you have tasks to work on and you write in them... So they are using them now more
That's a possibility. But it looks so bad. If it was generated by ai, why would they ask to make it look like a grainy scan taken from a book on a scanner from the 90s? Hopefully your note was friendly, as everyone can make mistakes, and teachers deserve big piles of gold delivered every week to their homes. Wouldn't it be funny if you made a mistake or didn't understand the instructions? I have no idea either way, I've never seen this kind of math problem, I just think it would be funny, especially if you were being an asshole to the person looking after your kid for 8 hours a day in your letter.
If i would post the whole page, you also would agree that its 10000 percent AI.
Yes i was nice. But you cant give that to your little students and didnt even did the tasks for yourself to check....
Thats the point i just cant justify
If you trust the source material, like the publisher of a math book, it's OK to not verify every single practice problem as a teacher. Editors are paid to do that.
If i would post the whole page, you also would agree that its 10000 percent AI.
Well do that then. Why should we take your word on it, there's no evidence here.
there's no evidence here.
Besides the fact that neither problem shown is actually solvable. Which is absolutely a mistake a clanker would make
Making mistakes is also a human problem, unfortunately. If you change the 8 to a 6, everything works, 300, 220, 350, 100, -50. My guess is a transcription error: the editors cleared the problem, but the typesetter fat fingered it when making a graphic.
OP mentioned that their Kid has not been taught the concept of negative numbers yet. So the -50 for the lower right part of the right "brick wall" wouldn't make sense either.
I also want to see the whole AI page please
Why look like an old 90s textbook? That's also whats being used to train models.
Warehouses of textbooks are being fed into the machines.
I think this is a plausible sequence of events:
That would explain the nonsensical numbers and the poor scan quality. Remember that not all teachers are comfortable with tech, so making carbon copies of a sheet of paper may be easier for them than obtaining the original digital file that ChatGPT spit out and printing it out.
Like I said, it's a possibility. I don't see any evidence for it though.
At this point I'm pretty sure you're being deliberately obtuse because you don't want to admit you're wrong
Lol ok, I think you need to chill... The difference between speculation and evidence is pretty clear cut to me. Evidence for a claim requires it to support your claim over other explanations. You can explain why a printout looks like a shitty photocopy either by using ai+shitty photocopier or just a shitty photocopier. Nothing in the comment or post preferentially supports the claim of ai use, other than a perceived math error.
Because AI is trained off of images that look like a book scanner from the 90s.
