>Biorecycling should definitely be cheaper since it's just using organisms to break the substance down into constituent compounds

I don't know what the preparations and costs for biorecycling is. How is it cheaper? What are the materials and processes and who is involved?

>Researchers have developed a family of eco-friendly glass of biological origin fabricated from biologically derived amino acids or peptides, this proposed glass is biodegradable and biorecyclable

Glass doesn't need to be biodegradable and biorecyclable. You can degrade it and recycle it. Crush it up and melt it down.

Let's see some applications. Maybe it has some useful properties? Let's see some manufacturing techniques. Maybe it's cheaper to make, or requires less energy?

You can certainly use insults to deliver an ad hominen, there are others, such as attacking character or reputation or with motive. Ad hominen is used to describe a strategy in which a person using it will focus on the person making an argument rather than the content of the argument.

>It's a pity schools can't teach people not to be bellends. You'd have benefited.

It's a pity schools don't teach people to just stop or say "I don't know", when they can't answer a question, instead of relying on ad hominems to end their conversations. You'd have benefitted.

>Not all writing is about the actual writing part, but mostly about comprehension, essay format, and proper citations.

Writing an ESSAY, which I believe is this context, is an exercise in sourcing, reading comprehension, critical thinking, grammar, spelling, sentence structure, document process, among other things.

>It’s like math, some might question why use a calculator for math, but it’s not about working math out by hand it’s about learning how to solve the problems.

We work out math problems by hand in order to learn the operations and sequences, exercise the computation, practice the writing of symbols, translate problems to rigor, among other things.

Admittedly, it's not about the hand eye coordination and fine motor skills. I will presume are not talking about that.

Quoting chatgpt would arguably, to lesser and more degrees, depending on the nature of the essay or curriculum, circumvent many of these skills which are learned in conjunction, by writing essays (and doing math).

>We're talking about pre-university level education, talking about quoting sources is rather grandiose.

And yet that is precisely what we are talking about here, isn't it?

>Most kids just look at the textbook and wikipedia. ChatGPT is not even lowering the level. Hopefully the context wasn't lost on you.

Then he already has a source, no? What is the point of quoting the chatgpt rather than the source? I see the point of READING the chatgpt. Not QUOTING it. Apparently the context was indeed lost on you.

Even if you used chatgpt for READING comprehension, you wouldn't want them to quote it for submitting an essay. You would always want them to quote the source in homework or a test or a thesis, something the student WROTE. Hopefully the context wasn't lost on you.

I guess they need another exodus as a reminder why it didn't go well the first time.

>Perhaps if you used it to summarize work that you created?

I would want my students to learn and practice how to summarize work on their own.

The only good reason I can think of would be in the context of mass summaries. Chatgpt would be good at creating many summaries all at once. It's scalable. As an experimental tool or to show examples and patterns. I can't see any justifiable uses for students in a typical classroom, and certainly not for submitting work on behalf of the student, instead of the student writing it themselves.

> I can't see trusting it as a source for information since it doesn't provide sources to where it has learned information, at least by default.

I wouldn't trust it, at all. It's not just the source information. Even if it pulled from good sources, it doesn't perform any comprehension or logic or reasoning of the content. The way it works is through a language model. It arranges words together much like a glorified auto complete does. It doesn't check to see whether what it wrote is coherent or correct.

>If you're dealing with grammar, you're 99.9% doing it in the digital world and can easily fix it with assistance with no drawbacks.

>If you're in the casino wondering what's the chance of rolling snake eyes, you're unlikely to be pulling out your phone, so I'd say basic math is much more important than perfect grammar without assistance.

So you think students should learn math in case they want to gamble? That's your best argument?

>Because you won't have a spell checker in your pocket at all times in the real life...

You also have a calculator in your pocket at all times in the real life. What's your opinion on whether or not students should learn math?

Why would anyone be allowed to quote Chatgpt in their essay?

What value would a teacher see in quoting a chatgpt for their student? How does quoting a Chatgpt improve education?

I can possibly see using it to get a summary, for ones own reading compression on a topic. But not as a source to quote from for your essay. It's built on top of language models. Essentially, it mimicks our writing. Depending on what you feed it, "sometimes good, sometimes like shit."

Wouldn't that depend on what decisions were made by who?

What if doctors recommended an assisted birth but a pregnant woman insisted on a natural birth? How does vitamin D affect that decision?