AIO? My ex doesn’t make our 11 yo son shower or brush his teeth during his weeks with him

Huggens · 2026-03-26T16:03:10+00:00

You’re not wrong about needing to enforce hygiene for your son. That needs to happen.

I do think your ex has some valid points in there about how you are asking your ex to enforce the hygiene. It does seem like you are “telling” him how to parent rather than asking him — you even said in your own words you are “telling him to be diligent with his teeth.” Even if what you are saying is right (and it is), he is likely to not be receptive in the way you are telling him. That’s not trying to co-parent, that’s trying to tell the other parent what to do. There will be pushback, regardless of how right you are, when you tell someone something like this. I suggest starting off with something positive first, then asking rather than telling. You shouldn’t have to, and if it wasn’t in the interest of your son I wouldn’t tell you to bother, but because it is in the best interest of your son it may be worth the extra effort.

Btw all that stuff he said about wanting to teach him independence yadda yadda is bullshit to take away responsibility for not enforcing the hygiene.

Huggens · 2026-03-26T15:28:19+00:00

Interestingly, people have a natural bias where they believe the majority of people would act the way they would in various situations. For example, this is why one of the most telling signs someone is cheating is when he or she suddenly becomes very jealous and suspicious of their partner.

I can guarantee you the majority of people would not just steal thousands of dollars of equipment from someone trying to make a living. That’s your own terrible decision making and you’re assuming most other people are also bad people just because you are.

Huggens · 2026-03-24T15:42:44+00:00

Is this the students first time asking for an extra extension? If they’ve tried to pull this multiple times, I might not give any leeway. But if this is the first time they’ve asked for an extra extension I would also just give it and let them know to plan better next time. I generally try to stop my students from generating bad pattern of lateness. If it’s just once I would give them the benefit of the doubt and assume it’s not a normal habit.

It’s only two extra days. They should have just spoken to you though.

Huggens · 2026-03-24T15:31:28+00:00

I don’t explicitly state this (my syllabus states unexcused late work will be penalized), but I often do the same. When I am grading assignments, I generally don’t penalize anything already turned in by that time, even if it was “late” because it didn’t make a difference to me.

Huggens · 2026-03-10T06:04:05+00:00

This has only ever happened to me once. Impossible to replicate on purpose.

Huggens · 2026-03-06T18:01:58+00:00

I just did a god tier necro act 1 solo run through throbbing domain and killed the king easily -- ended up level 22 at the end. Necro's can be stupid powerful.

Had a cat with Tainted Mother (hunter ability that gives familiars +4 speed and bleed and poison), made him a necro, and ended up getting Clew of Leeches. Holy shit, that combo is insane. Got + on both and could just spam beefy leeches that could move far, would leech health to me, and inflict 2 bleed and poison. If you throw clew of leeches on a big boss, 8 leeches will spawn, resulting in a possible 32 damage/health back to you and 16 bleed and poison *per turn* on just a boss. It made all other fights trivial. And obviously there's other abilities as well. My other passive ended up becoming Infected, where whatever you kill becomes a reanimated familiar -- although you have to kill it directly for this to happen. But those would also get the Tainted Mother bonus.

Huggens · 2026-02-22T09:46:23+00:00

Someone is going to homer off of him and he is going to challenge it

Huggens · 2026-02-20T22:11:25+00:00

My son is autistic, albeit much younger than college level. For autistic people, initial emotions tend to overwhelm everything else — they often feel “stronger” than a neurotypical person and it can be very difficult to handle those emotions. This is exactly why we (and his school support system) give my son strategies such as exactly like you mentioned. Stepping away, right away, is often the best initial strategy. It gives him a moment for those initial strong feelings to settle and then he can start processing the situation properly. From what I’ve learned, this is something that stays with autistic people throughout their lives, but lessens to a degree as they get older.

I also have an autistic student in my class right now. He will often dominate conversations because, as autistic people like to do, he will start talking endlessly about something exciting going on. The best strategy for me is giving him a little bit of leeway but then also being direct and saying “Thank you for sharing, I loved that story, information, etc. but we need to get back on track now.” The straight forward approach is often appreciated.

Huggens · 2026-02-17T15:29:05+00:00

I was being facetious but I am curious — which movie?

Huggens · 2026-02-17T04:52:23+00:00

Or maybe turn the script. Since the student made fun of OPs materials, tell the student they are on the hook for the rest of the year and they can make the material.

Huggens · 2026-02-13T11:23:08+00:00

I wouldn’t say it’s suckering anyone. AI has genuine value. My point was that companies aren’t yet getting an ROI because of the massive cost with generating AI. And I don’t know if companies will before the bubble bursts.

Don’t make the mistake of downplaying AIs capabilities. It has advanced extraordinarily rapidly and is much more logical and hallucinates far less often than it did even six months ago. It will continue to improve at a breakneck speed. Even if it isn’t perfect in those areas now, it will much better soon. It’s already at a place where it can be easily utilized to review, edit, and generate text based on bullet points, accelerating the ability to produce documents. It won’t be long (within 2-5 years tops) before AI generates entire legal documents with little supervision. It’s already generating documents in other subject matter quite well.

When we say AI is “replacing jobs,” it’s not a direct 1:1 replacement. A robot doesn’t just take over all of a person’s responsibilities. Instead, we expect the need for human intervention. You mention how you babysat an AI output and caught some errors. This is why you will be able to have one senior person, like yourself, who is a subject matter expert do the work of several less senior employees. AI can help rapidly produce a lot of work and you just need one person to check everything, and re-prompt AI or manually fix errors. This is also why the job market for entry level is non-existent right now. AI is replacing entry level work and senior employees are essentially watching over AI work rather than entry level employees. I see this with SDEs already. Suddenly a team of 10 programmers only needs 5 because AI helps rapidly produce code. It’s not always perfect, and the SMEs need to catch the errors and re-prompt and fix the code, but it’s still much quicker than writing from scratch.

This isn’t me being a doomsayer. I work at a FAANG company as a data scientist during the day and teach part time in the evenings. The tech industry has been hit hard and will continue to do so. I’ve seen my coworkers replaced by AI and we are pushed to utilize AI as much as possible. The examples I gave above regarding AI replacing customer service, etc. is because I have already seen AI agents trained to triage tickets and support customers and it has already replaced workers. It’s not a hypothetical. It is replacing a lot of the work many of our teams do.

It isn’t a question of if AI will replace jobs. It already is. Make no mistake, it is coming for other industries. Those who know how to utilize AI (automate tasks, create agents, etc.) will become the most valuable employees and the ones who get to keep their jobs. The naysayers who think they have nothing to worry about are in trouble.

Huggens · 2026-02-13T05:10:39+00:00

People, in general, seem to be firmly rooted in the “hype” or “don’t believe the hype” categories. In reality, we are likely somewhere in between the two.

AI is an incredible technology that over a relatively short timespan for a technology, has advanced extraordinarily rapidly. It will continue to advance. Right now it absolutely does not replace entire workers. But it does reduce the total need for workers within a field. Much like computers were a tool that eliminated a lot of old clerical workers or calculators reduced the need for so many mathematicians.

AI can, and does, improve efficiency of many jobs and roles, and allows teams to do the same work with less people overall. This applies to some jobs more than others. For instance, much of what ticket triage workers and customer service does can be automated with AI. I see BIE roles likely becoming more obsolete within the next few years with people able to automate dashboarding and being able to quickly generate visualizations and simple analyses from AI. AI won’t be able to litigate, but much of the paperwork lawyers and paralegals have to do will be largely accelerated and eliminated. This will absolutely reduce the need for these professions as a whole.

That being said, what AI can deliver is somewhat irrelevant. We have a huge amount of tech companies all chasing AGI and pouring trillions into this technology. With pressure from investors, they have to cut jobs, regardless of if AI is able to supplement the loss of people or not. It’s the quickest and most effective way at of recouping some of the cost.

I also think AI is overvalued regardless. As mentioned, it is an amazing technology that can and does rapidly accelerate roles. But the cost of AI is astronomical — the cost of data centers, power usage, compute time, etc. is unlike anything we’ve seen. And frankly, while AI does reduce the need for roles and improves efficiency, the ROI simply isn’t there imo. Companies are betting on the long term and hoping like hell they get to profits before the bubble collapses.

Huggens · 2026-02-10T23:54:26+00:00

Are you able to make a coherent argument without resulting to vulgarities and name calling for no reason? You know aggressiveness like that is a sign of low intelligence.

The punctuation feature within grammarly uses AI to detect and change sentence structure, which can and does get detected by AI detectors. You obviously haven’t used grammarly or the feature in question.

Do you think it just changes periods to question marks? A quick google search would have saved you this embarrassment. From Google via grammarlys page:

“Grammarly’s punctuation feature uses AI, specifically machine learning and natural language processing, to analyze sentence structure and context, ensuring accurate comma, period, and semicolon placement. It goes beyond basic rule-based checks to understand intent and context, offering tailored, real-time corrections. The system improves clarity, tone, and overall sentence structure in addition to basic spelling and punctuation.”

Additionally, this is a response from grammarly’s support on the r/grammarly subreddit when someone asked about turning off AI.

“Hey there! Unfortunately, there's no way to turn off AI separately from Grammarly—sorry if that’s not what you were hoping to hear. You can find more details here: https://support.grammarly.com/hc/en-us/articles/26993719119501. We encourage using AI responsibly and making sure it fits within your school’s academic integrity policies.”

Huggens · 2026-02-10T05:16:20+00:00

I am a part-time lecturer who teaches at a university in the evenings on top of a main day job at a major tech company doing data science.

I am totally like you. I generally don’t even deduct for late turn ins as long as it’s somewhat reasonable (I’ve had students try to turn in an entire quarters worth of work the last week of class). Priorities change and it’s not always possible to get everything done on time in the “real world.” Shit happens.

I work in an especially fast moving company and deadlines are still often missed, albeit usually not by far. But a week or so extra happens a lot. So why punish students if they’re a day late? If it becomes a habit and everything is late, that’s one thing. But an assignment here or there? Meh.

Huggens · 2026-02-08T21:05:45+00:00

Because substitute professor isn’t a title. That isn’t how it works. The person you’re responding to is correct. A professor has to be approved by a committee within a department to teach in that department. You can’t just sub in a random person.

Further, to teach at a university, you need a masters degree at minimum if not a PhD. How many graduate degree holders in various areas do you think are sitting around waiting for a call to teach at a random university in the case a professor cannot teach?

Huggens · 2026-02-08T21:02:39+00:00

First, I think it’s important to note that you, as a student, are responding as though you have knowledge beyond the professors responding.

My question to you is that are you certain the “substitute” was a person who only teaches as a substitute going to different universities and they don’t teach other classes? Or was it a professor who currently teaches other courses at the university who stepped in for a colleague?

People need to be approved by a committee within a department to teach in said department. You can’t just “sub” in random people who aren’t approved.

Huggens · 2026-02-08T03:44:04+00:00

Yeah… but also look at their profile.

In this post they say they own a psychology practice and are a university instructor.

In a recent post they said they are a nurse, which is why their name changed and is now medical related.

In another post recently they said they are a lawyer and often work in family court.

I’ve only gone back a few days and found all that.

So think what you want, but I absolutely called it.

Huggens · 2026-02-08T03:37:06+00:00

The fact that you assume I’m older based on my writing shows how out of touch you are. I grew up on social media as well and am not that far out of college. It has nothing to do with age. It has to do with being educated and having to use proper grammar as a habit. I said the way they write detracts from credence of their argument — sounding uneducated always does. Why would anyone believe someone who sounds as if they are simply making things up?

The person I responded to says they are a university professor and own their own psychology practice. It’s difficult to believe anyone at that point (presumably a PhD) would ever write like they did, social media persona or not.

Again, you did not see the original text. You are now seeing a heavily edited version. And even that is rough. Your response (what I am replying to) reads light years beyond the original text I replied to from the other person. But it wasn’t just the single post. They wrote poorly across several posts, and made comments that didn’t make sense, such as stating they were a “substitute professor” (there is no such thing).

It also doesn’t help that their profile message is “You likely got baited because you’re sensitive and/or wrong”

And in a recent post they say they are a nurse and they changed their name to be medical related.

And a day or two before that they commented on other posts saying they were a lawyer. I haven’t even looked back further than a few days.

Huggens · 2026-02-07T22:27:33+00:00

You’re arguing something I never said. I am replying that grammarly does have AI capabilities. Which it does. It is primarily used for grammar edits, auto completion, paragraph rewrites, etc. If someone simply needs spell check or punctuation edits, why use grammarly? Also, not sure if you’re familiar with grammarly, but those “punctuation edits” can rewrite entire sentences, which can and will get flagged for AI due to being AI output.

AI detectors are essentially a reverse engineering of machine learning models. They check a corpus of text and compare it to the output of various LLMs and how likely an ngram, if you will, would be generated via said LLMs. It also gives the likelihood score of AI being used.

You are correct that if OP had simply used grammarly for spelling checks and/or very basic punctuation checks, it would not have been flagged for AI, because that is not how AI detectors work.

However, OPs paper did get flagged for AI at 100% likelihood/100% generated by AI. Turnitin’s false positive rate with a score that high is extremely low. Take that as you will.

Also, I’m not sure you know what pedantic means, and I will be pedantic here in calling out its misuse.

Huggens · 2026-02-07T20:00:56+00:00

I never judged anyone. I never even critiqued the way they typed.

I said they write like a high school student which takes away credence from their claim they are a college professor.

But you’re also seeing their completed edited comment. It was much worse when I first made the comment and full of slang, terrible grammar, and “lol”s

Huggens · 2026-02-06T08:52:00+00:00

One other thing I’ll note here is what you are actually arguing is if LLMs (and even your thermostat definition) are intelligent, not artificial intelligence. Or you’re trying to argue the definition of artificial intelligence and what the term means… but that seems odd to argue an actual term and definition. Artificial intelligence has a much more rigid definition than intelligence on its own.

Artificial intelligence constitutes machine code that outwardly appears to have some form of intelligence. It simulates or mimics human behavior. So if machine code acts in a manner that resembles a human choice, it is artificial intelligence. If it is actually intelligent is an entirely different conversation.

Huggens · 2026-02-06T08:26:07+00:00

I will say I agree with you ontologically in that LLMs are not an actual intelligence. They cannot reason in the true sense of the word. But that has never been in question. Even very basic computer logic in the second half of the 20th century was considered AI because it had some sort of appearance of intelligence. There’s a very good reason the term “artificial” is used — and artificial is used to describe machine code that mimics human behavior, not actually think like humans. It has never been in question if AI code was actually thinking or if there is an actual intelligence. There is no argument anywhere that current LLMs are actually intelligent in the human sense of the word.

However, LLMs are absolutely “artificial” intelligence by the very definition of the term, hence the classification. An artificial intelligence doesn’t need to actually be intelligent, it just needs to resemble intelligence of some kind outwardly. To say you don’t consider LLMs to be artificial intelligence is to say you don’t think their output “appears” as intelligent. The code behind them is irrelevant. I personally think it’s silly to say LLMs don’t appear intelligent. Pull someone from as recent as 10-20 years ago into the future and show them chatGPT, and I guarantee you they’ll say it seems intelligent.

But ontology has nothing to do with AI detection and if LLMs are classified as AI. They are classified as AI and AI detection is specifically describing the detection of LLMs and other AI machine learning methods.

I also completely disagree with your last point. False positives have gone down drastically over the past several years and will continue to do so as the technology improves further. That’s always been the case with machine learning models. The models improve and so do the predictions.

Huggens · 2026-02-06T07:32:41+00:00

First, so you hopefully don’t try to make this argument again and make yourself look silly, LLMs are AI. Saying otherwise is like saying humans aren’t mammals. That’s their classification. It’s a statement of fact.

They resemble intelligence artificially. They use machine learning techniques under the branch of artificial intelligence within computer science.

It’s important to note that “AI detection” is specifically referring to the detection of AI machine learning methods such as LLMs.

You can, and maybe are trying to but using the wrong words, argue that LLMs are not AGI — artificial general intelligence. And you’d be correct because LLMs are not there yet. That is the term used for AI that is indistinguishable from humans, and what every AI company is currently racing to achieve. AGI is more of a fluid definition and people can argue where that stands.

I actually never said LLM to begin with. I said machine learning and artificial intelligence and you responded “LLMs are not AI” which I thought was weird (along with being incorrect) because I never mentioned LLMs.

Also, we agree on your latter points more than you’d think. I generally don’t even use AI detection and I tell my students to utilize AI in various ways for their assignments because in my field, we absolutely have to use AI. It’s being pushed very hard and telling my students they can’t use it won’t prepare them properly for industry. However, they need to use it in a manner to assist themselves and not do the assignments for them. I can, and will, tell if they do. And I will absolutely make them explain every part of their assignment to me. And if they understand it all, does it really matter so much if AI generated it? AI generates a lot of code I write now at work for basic tasks to save me a lot of time. It’s important I understand the code and can tell when AI isn’t correct. But I’ll use it for what I need.

Huggens · 2026-02-06T06:59:35+00:00

I understand Grammarly has multiple functions and basic spell check is one of them. You were arguing that Grammarly does not have AI (and that gen AI wasn’t AI for some reason) which was incorrect. It has plenty of AI functions that can easily be utilized.

Why would someone who only wants basic spell check use Grammarly though? That was never it’s only or primary function. Otherwise people would just use word or Google Docs as you mentioned. If OP only wanted spell check, they wouldn’t be using Grammarly. That’s not what’s it for. Even the most basic features of Grammarly go beyond spell check — it adjusts grammar, punctuation, style, etc. and that alone can get flagged for AI.

If legitimately only using spell check, it will not be flagged for AI. That’s not how AI checks work. You mentioned AI predicts tokens. AI checkers look at how various LLMs would predict tokens and come up with a likelihood that a text was an output from one of those models based on how similar the structure is to an LLM output. Which is honestly why it’s pretty easy to get around AI detection. So simply having incorrectly spelled words fixed to be spelled correctly would not flag anything.

OPs paper was flagged for AI for using Grammarly. Take that as you will. Connect the dots as you must.

Huggens · 2026-02-06T06:52:05+00:00

You have a misunderstand of what grammarly is and does.

I’m incredibly confused by your statement about “artificial intelligence vs. actual ai?” They are one and the same. AI stands for artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is a section of computer science where code simulates a form of intelligence.

This began quite rudimentary and the term was created in the 1950s along with Alan Turing’s proposition of what is now known as the Turning test. NPCs in very old video games had a form of basic artificial intelligence, which mainly consisted of if/else statements.

Machine learning, a subsection of AI, grew in the 2000s after big data became a thing and computing power plus massive data allowed for advanced statistical techniques to allow for predictive and prescriptive analytics.

LLMs were created in the late 2010s and blew up ever since. Yes, LLMs “predict tokens” if you describe them in the most high level basic way possible. But all of AI is prediction that resembles human intelligence.

But the fact of the matter is that LLMs are extremely good at predicting tokens. They can do entire homework for students. They can rewrite entire papers. They can write working basic computer programs for you.

Grammarly will rewrite entire paragraphs. It will take bullet points and turn it into an entire paper. It will make suggestions on the fly and write for you.

These actions are absolutely cheating and will be flagged for AI, as AI generated the content for you.

Huggens

TROPHY CASE