ChatGPT generates Windows 11 keys

[Theblacksheep]

There is no rule that says you must ban AI websites.

 

There is a rule on "Education institutions must continue to protect their students from harmful content online, including that which might be produced by generative AI".

 

The openai T&C says over 13s only with parental permission.

[JJonas]

but is it generating valid keys?

 

I took part in a ARG recently and ChatGPT was particularly bad at some of the ciphers. It produced output that looked good but did not stand up to proper analysis.

[MrEprise]

Beta, Generic and KMS Client keys which are already published elsewhere on the internet as far as I could tell.

[mavhc]

Yeah, it's not magic, it's just clickbait

 

"Education institutions must continue to protect their students from harmful content online, including that which might be produced by generative AI"

 

So you must have code that can read a website in the browser, just monitoring the connection says nothing about what appears to the user, email can have harmful content, javascript on the page can create content on the fly

[CHiLL]

So you must have code that can read a website in the browser, just monitoring the connection says nothing about what appears to the user, email can have harmful content, javascript on the page can create content on the fly

Or a filtering solution that categorises websites/URLs and blocks those categories.

[mavhc]

But websites and URLs are dynamic, can't just block based on what you see once.

 

Who has a group that they put >=13 year olds in for filtering?

[CHiLL]

But websites and URLs are dynamic, can't just block based on what you see once.

 

Who has a group that they put >=13 year olds in for filtering?

I don't understand why this is such a sticking point. Exam boards are within their rights to say that generative AI sites are blocked during exams, which would also apply to online exams where the Internet cannot be disabled but definately restricted. They can also suggest that students should not have access to generative AI sites whilst in school or on school devices and I fully expect that to come down as DfE guidance in the future.

 

We can block Internet access entirely, but unless you're operating a specific allow list only filtering system, there will always be sites that fall through the cracks. You can't tell me that students in your environment haven't accessed material that they shouldn't whilst in school because the filter didn't block it. We have to operate within the guidance as best we can and with the resources/services we have access to.

[dmj]

I don't understand why this is such a sticking point. Exam boards are within their rights to say that generative AI sites are blocked during exams, which would also apply to online exams where the Internet cannot be disabled but definately restricted. They can also suggest that students should not have access to generative AI sites whilst in school or on school devices and I fully expect that to come down as DfE guidance in the future.

 

We can block Internet access entirely, but unless you're operating a specific allow list only filtering system, there will always be sites that fall through the cracks. You can't tell me that students in your environment haven't accessed material that they shouldn't whilst in school because the filter didn't block it. We have to operate within the guidance as best we can and with the resources/services we have access to.

 

I think the point is that with API access to AI it's now trivial to add some form of AI to websites and it's virtually impossible to tell what generative AI and what is not. How would you know?

[sigma]

But websites and URLs are dynamic, can't just block based on what you see once.

 

Who has a group that they put >=13 year olds in for filtering?

 

Any decent filter should reclassify pages after a certain amount of time to account for changes.. Mostly they classify the domain which is why this:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/ab7a165a-3904-477b-8878-e55833f44e1a (Please excuse. It's my goto test page to test classification. My filter classifies it a "General News").

 

is marked as fine for KS1 and KS2 (usually), even though the BBC state that BBC3 is not designed for young children.

 

We have such a group.

[mavhc]

The point is people go "omg, AI, ban it!", not "omg, AI, that's interesting, how can we incorporate it into education as it's likely to be very important to our students as they'll spend most of their lives in the future"

 

Classifying sites is only level 1 of filtering, also need real time on device monitoring of what the page says at any specific second.

 

Block everything during an exam, use allow list if online exam.

 

Students have tried to access sites like Google, that sometimes contain bad words, and then the local monitoring blocks it in real time.

 

If I make a website that uses javascript to generate random words, will your systems block it?

[JJonas]

Time for this quote from Douglass Adams

 

 

[sigma]

The point is people go "omg, AI, ban it!", not "omg, AI, that's interesting, how can we incorporate it into education as it's likely to be very important to our students as they'll spend most of their lives in the future"

 

Classifying sites is only level 1 of filtering, also need real time on device monitoring of what the page says at any specific second.

 

Block everything during an exam, use allow list if online exam.

 

Students have tried to access sites like Google, that sometimes contain bad words, and then the local monitoring blocks it in real time.

 

If I make a website that uses javascript to generate random words, will your systems block it?

 

It would say "New url" and then attempt assign it to a categeory before allowing you access (or not). I've yet to see any fitering system that would appear to get it right more than 50% of the time though. The classification engines are abysmal in spite of all the claims.

[AlistairB1983]

The point is people go "omg, AI, ban it!", not "omg, AI, that's interesting, how can we incorporate it into education as it's likely to be very important to our students as they'll spend most of their lives in the future"

The counterpoint being made is that this is a decision that needs to be made at much higher levels than we - be it DfE, Awarding Bodies, JCQ etc.

 

It's not for an individual - either institution or person - to make the decision on what is/isn't right for the education of our students. These decisions are made by those with the power to do so, not by us refusing to follow guidance because we may not agree with it.

 

If you feel that passionately about it, try speaking to those that actually make the decisions rather than deriding those of us who chose to follow them?

[mavhc]

Who's deriding anyone?

 

The rules have flexibility, some people jump to ban everything new asap just in case. No calculators! No internet! Over time they become acceptable and assumed to be used.

 

https://hackeducation.com/2015/03/12/calculators

 

"While the general public debated whether or not calculators should be allowed at school, educators were forced to grapple with how the devices would change math instruction."

 

Took 10-15 years for exams to be used in an exam.