axios

chatgpt-hits-200-million-active-weekly-users,-but-how-many-will-admit-using-it?

ChatGPT hits 200 million active weekly users, but how many will admit using it?

AI, AI critics, AI prohibition, AI stigma, axios, Biz & IT, chatgpt, chatgtp, Ed Zitron, Ethan Mollick, machine learning, openai / /

Your secret friend —

Despite corporate prohibitions on AI use, people flock to the chatbot in record numbers.

–

The OpenAI logo emerging from broken jail bars, on a purple background.

On Thursday, OpenAI said that ChatGPT has attracted over 200 million weekly active users, according to a report from Axios, doubling the AI assistant’s user base since November 2023. The company also revealed that 92 percent of Fortune 500 companies are now using its products, highlighting the growing adoption of generative AI tools in the corporate world.

The rapid growth in user numbers for ChatGPT (which is not a new phenomenon for OpenAI) suggests growing interest in—and perhaps reliance on— the AI-powered tool, despite frequent skepticism from some critics of the tech industry.

“Generative AI is a product with no mass-market utility—at least on the scale of truly revolutionary movements like the original cloud computing and smartphone booms,” PR consultant and vocal OpenAI critic Ed Zitron blogged in July. “And it’s one that costs an eye-watering amount to build and run.”

Despite this kind of skepticism (which raises legitimate questions about OpenAI’s long-term viability), OpenAI claims that people are using ChatGPT and OpenAI’s services in record numbers. One reason for the apparent dissonance is that ChatGPT users might not readily admit to using it due to organizational prohibitions against generative AI.

Wharton professor Ethan Mollick, who commonly explores novel applications of generative AI on social media, tweeted Thursday about this issue. “Big issue in organizations: They have put together elaborate rules for AI use focused on negative use cases,” he wrote. “As a result, employees are too scared to talk about how they use AI, or to use corporate LLMs. They just become secret cyborgs, using their own AI & not sharing knowledge”

The new prohibition era

It’s difficult to get hard numbers showing the number of companies with AI prohibitions in place, but a Cisco study released in January claimed that 27 percent of organizations in their study had banned generative AI use. Last August, ZDNet reported on a BlackBerry study that said 75 percent of businesses worldwide were “implementing or considering” plans to ban ChatGPT and other AI apps.

As an example, Ars Technica’s parent company Condé Nast maintains a no-AI policy related to creating public-facing content with generative AI tools.

Prohibitions aren’t the only issue complicating public admission of generative AI use. Social stigmas have been developing around generative AI technology that stem from job loss anxiety, potential environmental impact, privacy issues, IP and ethical issues, security concerns, fear of a repeat of cryptocurrency-like grifts, and a general wariness of Big Tech that some claim has been steadily rising over recent years.

Whether the current stigmas around generative AI use will break down over time remains to be seen, but for now, OpenAI’s management is taking a victory lap. “People are using our tools now as a part of their daily lives, making a real difference in areas like healthcare and education,” OpenAI CEO Sam Altman told Axios in a statement, “whether it’s helping with routine tasks, solving hard problems, or unlocking creativity.”

Not the only game in town

OpenAI also told Axios that usage of its AI language model APIs has doubled since the release of GPT-4o mini in July. This suggests software developers are increasingly integrating OpenAI’s large language model (LLM) tech into their apps.

And OpenAI is not alone in the field. Companies like Microsoft (with Copilot, based on OpenAI’s technology), Google (with Gemini), Meta (with Llama), and Anthropic (Claude) are all vying for market share, frequently updating their APIs and consumer-facing AI assistants to attract new users.

If the generative AI space is a market bubble primed to pop, as some have claimed, it is a very big and expensive one that is apparently still growing larger by the day.

ChatGPT hits 200 million active weekly users, but how many will admit using it? Read More »

some-teachers-are-now-using-chatgpt-to-grade-papers

Some teachers are now using ChatGPT to grade papers

AI, AI ethics, AI in education, axios, Biz & IT, chatgpt, chatgtp, confabulation, education, hallucination, Houghton Mifflin Harcout, machine learning, openai, Writable / /

robots in disguise —

New AI tools aim to help with grading, lesson plans—but may have serious drawbacks.

–

An elementary-school-aged child touching a robot hand.

In a notable shift toward sanctioned use of AI in schools, some educators in grades 3–12 are now using a ChatGPT-powered grading tool called Writable, reports Axios. The tool, acquired last summer by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, is designed to streamline the grading process, potentially offering time-saving benefits for teachers. But is it a good idea to outsource critical feedback to a machine?

Writable lets teachers submit student essays for analysis by ChatGPT, which then provides commentary and observations on the work. The AI-generated feedback goes to teacher review before being passed on to students so that a human remains in the loop.

“Make feedback more actionable with AI suggestions delivered to teachers as the writing happens,” Writable promises on its AI website. “Target specific areas for improvement with powerful, rubric-aligned comments, and save grading time with AI-generated draft scores.” The service also provides AI-written writing-prompt suggestions: “Input any topic and instantly receive unique prompts that engage students and are tailored to your classroom needs.”

Writable can reportedly help a teacher develop a curriculum, although we have not tried the functionality ourselves. “Once in Writable you can also use AI to create curriculum units based on any novel, generate essays, multi-section assignments, multiple-choice questions, and more, all with included answer keys,” the site claims.

The reliance on AI for grading will likely have drawbacks. Automated grading might encourage some educators to take shortcuts, diminishing the value of personalized feedback. Over time, the augmentation from AI may allow teachers to be less familiar with the material they are teaching. The use of cloud-based AI tools may have privacy implications for teachers and students. Also, ChatGPT isn’t a perfect analyst. It can get things wrong and potentially confabulate (make up) false information, possibly misinterpret a student’s work, or provide erroneous information in lesson plans.

Yet, as Axios reports, proponents assert that AI grading tools like Writable may free up valuable time for teachers, enabling them to focus on more creative and impactful teaching activities. The company selling Writable promotes it as a way to empower educators, supposedly offering them the flexibility to allocate more time to direct student interaction and personalized teaching. Of course, without an in-depth critical review, all claims should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Amid these discussions, there’s a divide among parents regarding the use of AI in evaluating students’ academic performance. A recent poll of parents revealed mixed opinions, with nearly half of the respondents open to the idea of AI-assisted grading.

As the generative AI craze permeates every space, it’s no surprise that Writable isn’t the only AI-powered grading tool on the market. Others include Crowdmark, Gradescope, and EssayGrader. McGraw Hill is reportedly developing similar technology aimed at enhancing teacher assessment and feedback.

Some teachers are now using ChatGPT to grade papers Read More »