Lights Out For AI: China's Chatbots Go Dark To Keep College Entrance Exam Fair
Last Updated:
The Gaokao, running from June 7 to 10 this year, is given by over 13.4 million students who are vying for limited university spots in China.
China's artificial intelligence chatbots have temporarily hit the off switch on some key features, turning a little less smart for a very serious reason: preventing cheating during the massive Gaokao university entrance exams. Leading tech giants like Alibaba (with its Qwen bot), Tencent (Yuanbao), ByteDance (Doubao), and Moonshot (Kimi) are among those that have pulled the plug on their most popular AI tools' photo-recognition capabilities as authorities are making sure no student gets an unfair advantage during the high-stakes national tests.
The Gaokao, running from June 7 to 10 this year, is given by over 13.4 million students who are vying for limited university spots in China. China has earlier also gone all out with anti-cheating measures, from banning electronic devices to flying surveillance drones.
ByteDance's Doubao chatbot, a rival in the AI arena, reportedly still permits image uploads but refuses to answer any test-related queries, citing 'non-compliance with rules." Meanwhile, Alibaba's Qwen bot also reportedly refrains from analyzing test papers during exam hours.
This temporary suspension aligns with a broader regulatory framework for generative AI in education that the Chinese Ministry of Education previously released. The guidelines specifically prohibit students from independently utilizing artificial intelligence tools that generate open-ended content within primary and secondary school systems. Instead, educators are encouraged to integrate AI as a supplementary tool to studies, rather than a replacement for human-led instruction.
First Published:
June 10, 2025, 21:33 IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
Ant unit plans to apply for stablecoin issuer license in Hong Kong
Ant Group , an affiliate of China's e-commerce giant Alibaba , plans to apply for a license to issue stablecoins in Hong Kong through its overseas arm Ant International , the subsidiary said in a statement on Thursday. Last month, Hong Kong's legislature passed a stablecoin bill that establishes a licensing regime for fiat-referenced stablecoin issuers in Hong Kong. Stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency designed to maintain a constant value, usually pegged to a fiat currency such as the U.S. dollar, are commonly used by crypto traders to move funds between tokens. "We plan to apply for the fiat-referenced stablecoins (FRS) issuer's license once the process is open after the Stablecoins Ordinance takes effect on August 1," Ant International said in a statement. The move was first reported by Bloomberg News, which also said Ant would seek to apply for a stablecoin licenses in Singapore and Luxembourg as well. Live Events Ant was founded by billionaire Jack Ma and is 33% controlled by Alibaba. It operates China's ubiquitous mobile payments app Alipay . Discover the stories of your interest Blockchain 5 Stories Cyber-safety 7 Stories Fintech 9 Stories E-comm 9 Stories ML 8 Stories Edtech 6 Stories
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
China's Tech giants put a pin on AI tools during the High Stakes GaoKao Exams, as a way to control AI-driven Cheating
Strategic Intervention: No permanent damage: Live Events With the commencement Gaokao entrance examinations, highly competitive national university entrance exam, a number of China's technology giants, including Alibaba and Tencent, have decided to disable key AI features on their platforms to prevent students from resorting to cheating. Disabling the means of academic dishonesty was deduced to be an efficient way to ensure exam some of the country's most popular generative AI tools, such as Alibaba's Qwen Chatbot, have been deemed suspended, specifically in functions such as image recognition and real-time content generation during the Gaokao season. The move falls coordinatively with the exam season, during which approximately 13.4 million students are registered to appear for tests that determine their career proactive stance mitigates risks of AI-assisted cheating, thereby instilling an understanding amongst the students that exploiting AI is wrong. With AI chatbots being able to analyze exam questions and offer answers instantly, authorities are worried about their potential misuse during examinations. Therefore, disabling these features during this specific time period stands to be a responsible and risk-eliminating decision, helping to maintain the inviolable nature of the Gaokao examinations amidst the growing concerns of academic observers state that this is merely a temporary and tactical intervention and would not eventually lead to loss of interest in AI. This intervention is likely to be lifted once the examinations conclude. Investments made by the tech giants, like Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu, and Huawei, shall remain unaffected as well, even as they adapt to evolving regulatory approach is understood to be the gold standard for its global counterparts, where they could balance AI innovations with educational and security threat-related solutions. This move underlines the significance of responsible AI governance and demonstrates a practical and governance-driven approach. This move underlines the significance of responsible AI governance and demonstrates a practical and governance-driven approach.
Indian Express
3 days ago
- Indian Express
Meta and TikTok challenge tech fees in second highest EU court
Meta Platforms and TikTok said a European Union supervisory fee levied on them was disproportionate and based on a flawed methodology as they took their fight with tech regulators to Europe's second highest court on Wednesday. Under the Digital Services Act that became law in 2022, the two companies and 16 others are subject to a supervisory fee amounting to 0.05% of their annual worldwide net income aimed at covering the European Commission's cost of monitoring their compliance with the law. The size of the annual fee is based on the number of average monthly active users for each company and whether the company posts a profit or loss in the preceding financial year. Meta told judges at the General Court it was not trying to avoid paying its fair share of the fee, but it questioned how the Commission had calculated the levy, saying it had been based on the revenue of the group rather than of the subsidiary. Meta's lawyer Assimakis Komninos told the panel of five judges the company still did not know how the fee was calculated. He said the provisions in the Digital Services Act, or DSA, 'go against the letter and the spirit of the law, are totally untransparent with black boxes and have led to completely implausible and absurd results'. ByteDance-owned Chinese online social media platform TikTok was equally critical. 'What has happened here is anything but fair or proportionate. The fee has used inaccurate figures and discriminatory methods,' TikTok lawyer Bill Batchelor told the court. 'It inflates TikTok's fees, requires it to pay, not just for itself, but for other platforms and disregards the excessive fee cap,' he said. He accused the Commission of double counting the companies' users, saying this was discriminatory because users switching between their mobile phones and laptops would then be counted twice. He also said regulators had exceeded their legal power by setting the fee cap at the level of group profits. Commission lawyer Lorna Armati rejected both companies' arguments and defended the Commission's use of group profit as a reference value to calculate the supervisory fee. 'When a group has consolidated accounts, it is the financial resources of the group as a whole that are available to that provider in order to bear the burden of the fee,' she told the court. 'The providers had sufficient information to understand why and how the Commission used the numbers that it did and there is no question of any breach of their right to be heard now, unequal treatment,' she said. The Court is expected to issue its ruling next year. The cases are T-55/24 Meta Platforms Ireland v Commission and T-58/24 TikTok Technology v Commission.
