Latest news with #DanielSusskind
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Forget smartphones and wokery. There's an even greater threat to our children's education
Given that today's children appear to spend much of their time in school being taught that the Vikings were champions of diversity and that human beings should be encouraged to choose between one or more of 72 different genders, you may fear that educational standards in this country are slipping somewhat. But perhaps we should be grateful. Because, believe it or not, things could actually be worse. Say, for example, we were to follow a radical proposal made the other day by Daniel Susskind. Dr Susskind is an eminent economist, as well as the author of a book entitled A World Without Work: Technology, Automation and How We Should Respond. And, speaking at the Hay festival, he argued that the traditional school timetable should be ripped up, so that children can instead focus on learning to use artificial intelligence. 'We should be spending a third of the time that we have with students teaching them how to use these technologies,' he declared. 'How to write effective prompts and use these systems, get them to do what we want them to do…' I appreciate that Dr Susskind is an exceptionally learned and intelligent man. None the less, I for one think his proposal sounds horrifying. We often talk about the need to ban smartphones in schools. Which is fair enough. But my priority would be to ban AI. The fundamental purpose of education, after all, is to teach children how to think. AI, however, does the opposite. It teaches them that they don't need to think. Because it will do their thinking for them. For proof, look at what's already happening in universities. In April, The Chronicle of Higher Education – an American journal – reported that ever-growing numbers of students were essentially outsourcing their studies to AI. When a professor at New York University tried to prevent his students from using AI to complete their assignments, he was met with consternation. Some students protested that he was interfering with their 'learning styles'. Another complained: '[If] you're asking me to go from point A to point B, why wouldn't I use a car to get there?' Meanwhile, one student asked for an extension to a deadline, 'on the grounds that ChatGPT was down the day the assignment was due'. Still, I suppose we'd better get used to this sort of thing. It seems that a new educational era is upon us. One in which teachers get AI to set homework, pupils get AI to complete it, and then teachers get AI to mark it. Soon enough, there will be no need for human involvement at any stage of the process. So, as schools will effectively be superfluous, the Government might as well just shut them all down. In fact, I urge it to do so as quickly as possible. Such a move would immediately free up tens of billions of pounds a year. And since, in due course, AI will be taking all the jobs that today's children could have grown up to do, we'll need the money to pay their benefits. Heartfelt thanks to Ash Regan, the Scottish nationalist and one-time candidate to succeed Nicola Sturgeon as First Minister. Because on Sunday, she provided us with the one of the most memorable political quotes of the year. Even if not necessarily on purpose. Ms Regan was being interviewed by The Herald newspaper about her plans to clamp down on prostitution in Scotland, by criminalising the buying of sex. Wasn't there a risk, asked The Herald's reporter, that these plans might inadvertently drive prostitution underground? Ms Regan scoffed. Plainly she'd never heard anything so absurd. 'If you even think for one second, you cannot possibly drive prostitution underground,' she snorted. 'If you had a lot of women in underground cellars with a locked door, how would the punters get to them?' Having digested these extraordinary words, we can, I believe, draw only one conclusion. Ms Regan is 51 years old. And yet, during over a half a century on this planet, she has never heard – or at least, never understood – the phrase 'driven underground'. And so she'd taken it literally. After the interview, we must hope, a kindly aide will have taken her to one side, and gently explained that the expression is purely figurative. Otherwise, I fear that, despite Ms Regan's initial scoffing, she'll begin to worry that the reporter had a point – and that Scottish pimps really will take to opening brothels deep beneath the Earth's surface. If so, we must wait to see what revisions Ms Regan might make to her plans. Perhaps she will recommend that the Scottish NHS supply all prostitutes with free vitamin D tablets, to make up for the lack of sunlight they'll be getting. 'Way of the World' is a twice-weekly satirical look at the headlines while aiming to mock the absurdities of the modern world. It is published at 6am every Tuesday and Saturday Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Forget smartphones and wokery. There's an even greater threat to our children's education
Given that today's children appear to spend much of their time in school being taught that the Vikings were champions of diversity and that human beings should be encouraged to choose between one or more of 72 different genders, you may fear that educational standards in this country are slipping somewhat. But perhaps we should be grateful. Because, believe it or not, things could actually be worse. Say, for example, we were to follow a radical proposal made the other day by Daniel Susskind. Dr Susskind is an eminent economist, as well as the author of a book entitled A World Without Work: Technology, Automation and How We Should Respond. And, speaking at the Hay festival, he argued that the traditional school timetable should be ripped up, so that children can instead focus on learning to use artificial intelligence. 'We should be spending a third of the time that we have with students teaching them how to use these technologies,' he declared. 'How to write effective prompts and use these systems, get them to do what we want them to do…' I appreciate that Dr Susskind is an exceptionally learned and intelligent man. None the less, I for one think his proposal sounds horrifying. We often talk about the need to ban smartphones in schools. Which is fair enough. But my priority would be to ban AI. The fundamental purpose of education, after all, is to teach children how to think. AI, however, does the opposite. It teaches them that they don't need to think. Because it will do their thinking for them. For proof, look at what's already happening in universities. In April, The Chronicle of Higher Education – an American journal – reported that ever-growing numbers of students were essentially outsourcing their studies to AI. When a professor at New York University tried to prevent his students from using AI to complete their assignments, he was met with consternation. Some students protested that he was interfering with their 'learning styles'. Another complained: '[If] you're asking me to go from point A to point B, why wouldn't I use a car to get there?' Meanwhile, one student asked for an extension to a deadline, 'on the grounds that ChatGPT was down the day the assignment was due'. Still, I suppose we'd better get used to this sort of thing. It seems that a new educational era is upon us. One in which teachers get AI to set homework, pupils get AI to complete it, and then teachers get AI to mark it. Soon enough, there will be no need for human involvement at any stage of the process. So, as schools will effectively be superfluous, the Government might as well just shut them all down. In fact, I urge it to do so as quickly as possible. Such a move would immediately free up tens of billions of pounds a year. And since, in due course, AI will be taking all the jobs that today's children could have grown up to do, we'll need the money to pay their benefits. Going underground Heartfelt thanks to Ash Regan, the Scottish nationalist and one-time candidate to succeed Nicola Sturgeon as First Minister. Because on Sunday, she provided us with the one of the most memorable political quotes of the year. Even if not necessarily on purpose. Ms Regan was being interviewed by The Herald newspaper about her plans to clamp down on prostitution in Scotland, by criminalising the buying of sex. Wasn't there a risk, asked The Herald 's reporter, that these plans might inadvertently drive prostitution underground? Ms Regan scoffed. Plainly she'd never heard anything so absurd. 'If you even think for one second, you cannot possibly drive prostitution underground,' she snorted. 'If you had a lot of women in underground cellars with a locked door, how would the punters get to them?' Having digested these extraordinary words, we can, I believe, draw only one conclusion. Ms Regan is 51 years old. And yet, during over a half a century on this planet, she has never heard – or at least, never understood – the phrase 'driven underground'. And so she'd taken it literally. After the interview, we must hope, a kindly aide will have taken her to one side, and gently explained that the expression is purely figurative. Otherwise, I fear that, despite Ms Regan's initial scoffing, she'll begin to worry that the reporter had a point – and that Scottish pimps really will take to opening brothels deep beneath the Earth's surface. If so, we must wait to see what revisions Ms Regan might make to her plans. Perhaps she will recommend that the Scottish NHS supply all prostitutes with free vitamin D tablets, to make up for the lack of sunlight they'll be getting. ' Way of the World ' is a twice-weekly satirical look at the headlines while aiming to mock the absurdities of the modern world. It is published at 6am every Tuesday and Saturday
Telegraph
29-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Schools ‘should spend a third of the day teaching ChatGPT', says academic
Schools should spend a third of the day teaching children how to use AI tools such as ChatGPT, according to an Oxford academic. Dr Daniel Susskind, an economist and senior research associate at the Institute for Ethics in AI at the University of Oxford, said pupils are being taught antiquated methods and need to adjust to the changing technological landscape or risk being cast adrift in the 21st-century job market. 'In the 20th century, the best ideas we had about the world came from the heads of smart human beings. In the 21st century, I think the best ideas we have about the world – innovation and technological progress – are going to come from these technologies,' said Susskind. Use technology effectively Speaking at the Hay Festival, he said: 'If you walk into a lecture theatre or classroom today, and then you step into a time machine and go to a lecture theatre or classroom 100 years ago, it is going to look remarkably similar. Fundamentally, the way we educate hasn't changed and that can't be right. 'What I think is required at the moment in schools and universities: we should be spending about a third of the time we have with students teaching them how to use these technologies effectively. 'How to write effective prompts and get these systems to do what we want them to do, to understand the history of these technologies and how they work, to understand their limitations, to anticipate what they might get wrong and what they might hallucinate, and the ethical issues around using them.' 'Uncertainty is flexibility' He added that this sort of education should also be available to adults. 'There is a very strong cultural presumption that education is what you do at the start of your life and essentially, once it's done, you don't need to worry about it much again. You move through life drawing down on the human capital you built up when you were young,' Susskind said. 'And that is a big mistake because there's a huge amount of uncertainty about the future, what jobs are going to have to be done, and exactly what skills are going to be most valued. 'The best response we have to that uncertainty is flexibility, a willingness to retrain and reskill later in life.' Dr Susskind is a research professor at King's College London whose most recent book, Growth: A Reckoning, was chosen by Barack Obama as one of his favourite reads of 2024. Susskind was asked at the festival about the ethical implications of AI replacing human creativity. He replied: 'A decade ago it was very common to hear that creativity was a unique human thing. And I think that turns out not to be quite right.'
Metro
27-05-2025
- Health
- Metro
People aren't ready to let robots and AI decide on euthanisia, study finds
You'd probably let AI compose an email for you. Going over a medical scan to check for signs of cancer? Most likely, yes as well. But deciding when life support should be switched off for a patient in a coma? A new study has shown there's one clear line where we don't yet want a robot to take control, and that is deciding on the time of death. This may not be entirely surprising, given most would hope for humanity at the end of life. And so far, there are no healthcare providers which do allow AI to decide on when to switch off life support. But as both artificial intelligence and assisted dying are set to become more and more of a part of global healthcare systems, it's a question that is set to become more relevant – so researchers have looked at our attitudes towards such a prospect. An international study led by the University of Turku reveals that people are significantly less likely to accept euthanasia decisions made by artificial intelligence (AI) or robots compared to those made by human doctors. Participants in Finland, Czechia, and the UK were told about scenarios where patients were in end-of-life care, often in a coma. Even when decisions about ending life support were exactly the same, they were accepted less if made by AI than by humans. In other words, how we feel about a decision is not only about whether it was the right or wrong call, but who made it and how. Researchers called this phenomenon the 'Human-Robot Moral Judgment Asymmetry Effect', saying we hold robots to a higher moral standard. However, if the decision was to keep life-support switched on, or if patients could request assisted death themselves, there was no judgement asymmetry between the decisions made by humans and AI. The findings echo similar conclusions by AI experts, who say humans are not yet at a point to accept giving AI responsibility for serious decisions about our lives. A survey of the future of AI in the workplace by Microsoft found that in decisions which require accountability, we still want humans to be the ones making the call. Speaking after the report's release, Alexia Cambon, senior research director at the company, told Metro that there was a 'primal question' over how we should manage this new type of intelligence. She cited a recent paper by AI thinker Daniel Susskind, looking at what work will remain for humans to do once AI has thoroughly integrated into the workplace. 'One of them is the moral imperatives of society,' she said. 'As a society, I can't see a shortterm future anyway in which we will be happy for agents to manage humans. 'An agent can't make me feel seen, an agent can't can't make me feel connected to another human.' Mr Susskind said his view would be that ultimately, the paid work left for humans would be 'none at all', but that there are currently 'moral limits,' where human beings believe they require a 'human in the loop'. More Trending Michael Laakasuo, the lead investigator in the assisted dying study, said: 'Our research highlights the complex nature of moral judgements when considering AI decision-making in medical care. 'People perceive AI's involvement in decision-making very differently compared to when a human is in charge. 'The implications of this research are significant as the role of AI in our society and medical care expands every day. 'It is important to understand the experiences and reactions of ordinary people so that future systems can be perceived as morally acceptable.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Aldi salmon recalled in the US over fears of 'life-threatening' risk MORE: Travel warnings to Brits visiting Turkey over 'organ harvesting' after Beth Martin's 'heart removed' MORE: 'When I die, who will look after my special needs son?'
Irish Times
28-04-2025
- Health
- Irish Times
Three little letters that could help transform the Irish economy: PhD
There's a common misconception that all doctors wear white coats, carry stethoscopes, and have terrible handwriting. I'll admit to at least two of the three. But as someone who trained and practised as a medical doctor, I want to talk about a different kind of doctor: the PhD. A quiet but important transformation is already under way. Census 2022 showed more than 38,000 people in the Republic held a doctoral degree, up 74 per cent since 2011. In 2022, PhD enrolments increased by 5 per cent compared to the previous academic year, and 26 per cent since 2016. These numbers tell a story of progress, but they also hint at an untapped opportunity. We need to build a culture in this State that sees the pursuit of a PhD not as a curiosity or a niche calling, but as a viable path for individuals and our national economy. READ MORE Too often, PhD students are imagined as solitary figures in lab coats, fiddling with beakers or analysing arcane data, locked away for years at university, while their peers begin to climb the corporate ladder. The reality is far more exciting. Today's PhD graduates are fuelling the stburgeoning innovation ecosystem. They are solving real-world problems in industry, public policy, climate, and health. Unlocking a vast array of opportunities in emerging fields such as artificial intelligence. They are exactly the kind of minds we need to compete globally. In a time of geopolitical uncertainty and economic upheaval, with US tariffs looming and their retreat from international scientific leadership, the State stands at a crossroads. As America turns inward, we have an opportunity to turn outward, to become a global hub for ideas. And ideas, as the economist Daniel Susskind puts it in his recent book, Growth: A Reckoning , are what power modern economies. They can be reused and built upon without running out. It's these endlessly reusable ideas that have driven human progress and economic growth, and they come not from thin air, but from research, education, and, yes, from PhDs. PhDs are the machines that generate ideas. Patrick Guilbaud on bringing fine dining to Ireland, retirement plans, and not getting that third Michelin star Listen | 47:51 But these ideas don't live in academic journals or university libraries alone. PhD researchers increasingly bring their skills into the heart of industry, working in R&D departments of leading companies, driving innovation, product development, and long-term strategic thinking. More than half of full-time researchers in the EU now work in the business sector. Companies understand the value of this work. Take Apple, which spends more on research and development (R&D) in a year than the entire United Kingdom government. That's a recognition that investing in knowledge, creativity, and experimentation pays dividends in future products, competitiveness, and growth. The International Monetary Fund 2024 Fiscal Monitor states that increasing R&D support by 0.5 percentage points of gross domestic product (GDP) annually, or about 50 per cent more than the current level in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development economies, could raise GDP by up to 2 per cent, and reduce a country's debt-to-GDP ratio for an average advanced economy over the following eight years. That is a powerful return on investment, and one that starts with people. When we support PhDs, we're laying the groundwork for a more innovative, resilient Irish economy. However, we are entering a more fragmented global economy, with rising protectionism, trade tensions, and tariffs. History shows that these kinds of measures often lead to a decline in international competition. When competition drops, so too does the incentive to innovate. That's the danger for the Republic. A fall in global competition could trigger a slowdown in R&D investment here. This could create a ripple effect, dragging down productivity, increasing costs for Irish firms, and weakening the innovation spillovers we benefit from by being plugged into a competitive, globalised economy. The State must go in the opposite direction. We need to double down on investment in knowledge, research, and people. This Government understands what's at stake, it's right there in the programme for government. But in a time of growing economic uncertainty, we need to seize the initiative. Now is the moment to accelerate the delivery of these commitments. We must ramp up science, technology, engineering, and mathematics participation across further and higher education, provide greater support for PhD and early-career researchers, and build stronger links between academia and industry. That means formalising postdoctoral pathways, expanding graduate research funding, and sustaining growth through real collaboration. We should also deepen EU research and innovation partnerships, especially for SMEs, because innovation shouldn't just happen in labs; it should power our entire economy. This is how we transform our economy. And while the benefits to the economy are compelling, we shouldn't overlook the personal upside. PhD graduates enjoy a significant earnings premium, higher employment rates, and a diversity of career options. A recent Higher Education Authority analysis shows that doctoral graduates in the Republic enter the labour market successfully and maintain higher earnings for at least a decade post-graduation. Their skills are in demand both at home and abroad. Roughly a third of Irish PhD graduates are working overseas seven years after graduation. While that might sound like brain drain, it's actually soft power. These graduates carry Irish research, values, and influence into global institutions. And when they return, as many do, they enrich our research ecosystem with international experience, ideas, and networks. It's time we recognised the true value of a doctorate. Not just as a title, but as a tool for building 's future. Martin Daly is a Fianna Fáil TD for the Roscommon–Galway constituency
