ANY real kid that is unpretentious would do. A "I use AI to cheat at school" article would be far more interesting that this "Oh my God, my peers are hopeless but not me" piece.
I think this is a good point because "cheating at the work I have to do, as quickly as possible, well enough to not get fired" is the actual use case for AI for 99% of people.
All the stuff you see in this thread about how kids are going to use AI to bootstrap an education for themselves even better than what their teachers give them (not sure why there's so much hostility towards teachers) is a fantasy.
HN obviously overrepresents kids who were interested in tech things who may do something like that. The vast majority of kids will use AI as a tool to blurt out essays and coursework they don't read, so that they can get back to their addiction to TikTok and Instagram.
As will, of course, everyone using it at work. This is already the case. This is what AI is for. "Do this for me so I can scroll more".
If you're judging without even knowing the content of the hypothetical alternative then is the difference just that one premise offends you while the other supports you?
