> Han said he cheated by taking photos of the exam questions with a microcamera, sending them to an AI tool and checking the answers on a smartphone.
Han did not wear glasses in the video linked in the article, perhaps using a lapel, pencil, ring (the finger kind) or other camera.
Of course, this makes all us eyeglass wearers suspect. It raises the question of why smart phones were allowed, and the whole matter of exams, which I always hated, though I always did well.
I can recall two incidents, pertinent or not. I once took a physics exam asking for the flux change when a loop of wire was rotated parallel to a magnetic field. Every other person used the average, and I took the integral of 1/r dr, skewing the curve, but honestly.
Elsewhere, I took an exam for a sysadmin position, which I totally aced. Instead of hiring me, the company which shall remain nameless (and was bought by HP's photo division) hired two youngsters, who later went AWOL up to Lake Tahoe (PARTY, PARTY) on a weekend when the systems went kaput. But, you see, it was no problemo, as the acquisition went forward, someone or ones got filthy rich and in the startup world, "failure is not an option" It's standard equipment.
So much for exams. I always preferred the "show me" world to the Confucian world.
And as for the complexity of tax law ... I earlier [0] quoted someone as saying "The internet is composed entirely of edge cases." And so it is with tax law. "Tax law is composed entirely of loopholes."
Not to start a flame war, of course. '-)
Speaking of flame wars, if AI is so damn good with tax law, why are we using humans at this {necessary, despicable} task?
I was going to use AI as an excuse to duck jury duty (shame on me) but it turns out that the "I am over 70" option was available, and I exercised the "Uncle Leo" option. Clearly, anyone over 70 (ahem) might nap on the job.
And there's no written exam for jury duty, not parenthood, but for driving ---
Say, do these electromechanical monsters pass any exam, or only stopped school busses? Asking for kids at risk.
If accounting is this easy to cheat on it does not bode well for the profession as a whole.
Leetcode problems are easy to cheat on
You will see more of this for sure, but not surprising.
> Han said he cheated by taking photos of the exam questions with a microcamera, sending them to an AI tool and checking the answers on a smartphone.
Han did not wear glasses in the video linked in the article, perhaps using a lapel, pencil, ring (the finger kind) or other camera.
Of course, this makes all us eyeglass wearers suspect. It raises the question of why smart phones were allowed, and the whole matter of exams, which I always hated, though I always did well.
I can recall two incidents, pertinent or not. I once took a physics exam asking for the flux change when a loop of wire was rotated parallel to a magnetic field. Every other person used the average, and I took the integral of 1/r dr, skewing the curve, but honestly.
Elsewhere, I took an exam for a sysadmin position, which I totally aced. Instead of hiring me, the company which shall remain nameless (and was bought by HP's photo division) hired two youngsters, who later went AWOL up to Lake Tahoe (PARTY, PARTY) on a weekend when the systems went kaput. But, you see, it was no problemo, as the acquisition went forward, someone or ones got filthy rich and in the startup world, "failure is not an option" It's standard equipment.
So much for exams. I always preferred the "show me" world to the Confucian world.
And as for the complexity of tax law ... I earlier [0] quoted someone as saying "The internet is composed entirely of edge cases." And so it is with tax law. "Tax law is composed entirely of loopholes."
Not to start a flame war, of course. '-)
Speaking of flame wars, if AI is so damn good with tax law, why are we using humans at this {necessary, despicable} task?
I was going to use AI as an excuse to duck jury duty (shame on me) but it turns out that the "I am over 70" option was available, and I exercised the "Uncle Leo" option. Clearly, anyone over 70 (ahem) might nap on the job.
And there's no written exam for jury duty, not parenthood, but for driving ---
Say, do these electromechanical monsters pass any exam, or only stopped school busses? Asking for kids at risk.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50420383