And is there some sort of problem with that for the academy? I don't know.

No.

And I mean, I'm going to resist answering equally stridently that comment.

But I mean, The part I would object to the most is the idea that having a strong position on something that disagrees with yours equates to completely dismissing or refusing to acknowledge that perspective.

You know, I mean, and yes, Jake says flat out in that interview, and it's true of him, that he's not particularly interested in knowing more about AI than he already does.

And, you know, There is something discordant about hearing someone whose job is education say, I don't need to know more about that specific thing.

I question how much the person you've interviewed knows about classical literature.

Agreed.

If we had a

majority or a critical mass of faculty that were rabidly anti-AI, I would consider it my job to try to convince them.

But I would absolutely not consider it my job or the institution's job to compel them.

I think that you get the best teaching when you take people who are passionate about their subject and passionate about teaching it, you give them as much freedom as is reasonable to teach it the way they think it should be taught, and you give them resources to get better at teaching.

And so it almost sounds a little Pollyanna-ish that way.

But to get, you know, I mean, to hone in on the example you gave, by sheer coincidence, Jake and I actually shared a student last term.

A student was simultaneously in his, I think it might have been an archaeology class.

Computer science is one of our