“And undergrads will continue to use generative AI, but their pockets aren’t deep (most likely they will turn to open source competitors).”
Our reading:
Undergraduates will continue to use generative AI, but their pockets aren't deep and they will most likely turn to open-source competitors.
Assessment: Supported
What happened
Did the forecast come true?
Outcome: Supported
The evidence matches what they said.
Judged on a plain reading. They named no measure, so we used the reading a typical informed reader would take. It is spelled out under “How we judged it”.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
The firm continued-use prediction is supported. Harvard respondents reported substantial generative AI use in April 2024, and the repeated UK survey documented continued widespread use through December 2025. These observations meet the early-resolution rule for persistence across academic periods. The hedged prediction about switching to open-source competitors is excluded from this outcome.
Caveats
- The evidence covers UK full-time undergraduates and respondents at one US institution, not every country.
- Survey responses are self-reports; the Harvard sample has selection limitations.
- This outcome establishes continued use, not indefinite future use, limited spending power, or open-source migration.
Evidence (3 items)
Supports the claim: Hirabayashi, Jain, Jurković and Wu, arXiv,
A large majority of respondents (87.5%) reported using generative AI.
Why it matters: The April 2024 Harvard undergraduate survey documents substantial use after the prediction. It is one institution's respondent sample, not a representative sample of all undergraduates.
- Publisher
- Hirabayashi, Jain, Jurković and Wu, arXiv
- Kind of source
- Preprint, not peer reviewed
- About events on
- Published
Supports the claim: Higher Education Policy Institute,
continues to increase.
Why it matters: The repeated survey reports generative AI use for assessments reaching 94%, following substantial use in earlier waves. Together with e1, this establishes persistence across successive academic periods.
- Publisher
- Higher Education Policy Institute
- Kind of source
- Independent measurement
- About events on
- Published
Context only: Higher Education Policy Institute,
near universality among undergraduates.
Why it matters: The accompanying release identifies December 2025 fieldwork and 1,054 full-time UK undergraduates. It confirms the population and timing of e2.
- Publisher
- Higher Education Policy Institute
- Kind of source
- Independent measurement
- About events on
- Published
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Forecast
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Conditions
- most likely (applies to the turn to open-source competitors) (their words)
Where we had to interpret
- Score the firm prediction that undergraduate use of generative AI will continue.
- Exclude the explicitly probabilistic open-source migration prediction from scoring, as required by the reviewer feedback.
- The comment about limited spending power explains the migration speculation; it is not an antecedent conditioning continued use.
- The ordinary reading predicts persistent use among undergraduates as a group. It does not require every student to use the tools or promise use forever.
- Repeated surveys after the post can establish persistence without inventing a deadline or a numerical adoption threshold.
Right if: Credible post-publication undergraduate surveys show substantial generative AI use persisting across successive academic periods.
Wrong if: Credible repeated surveys show that undergraduate generative AI use has broadly ceased or become negligible after the post.
We wrote this test after the outcome was known.
We found 26 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Marcus on AI, What if Generative AI turned out to be a Dud?, paragraph 3.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-28. The post may have been edited after 2023-08-13.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Marcus on AI, What if Generative AI turned out to be a Dud?
And undergrads will continue to use generative AI, but their pockets aren’t deep (most likely they will turn to open source competitors).
- Where
- paragraph 3
- Published
- 2023-08-13
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Supported. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
A reviewer said our test wasn’t fair to what was actually said.