I took an EE course last year that had a pretty effective way to assess, in my opinion.
Exams are definitely in person. Homework is not graded, except that once a week, one problem would be randomly selected from the homework for an in class quiz. The numbers would be changed up.
From my perspective, you didn't really have a choice but to be able to solve all of the problems on the homework unless you wanted to gamble failing that week's quiz. The answer key and AI are always available, but the learning got to happen on my terms. It was a good balance. And grading for the professor was relatively light since it was only one problem per student.
My wonder is if anybody would buy anything if value == price.
The value of water to a person dying from dehydration is infinite compared to someone who's adequately hydrated. By that logic, this bottle of water is worth every possession, good thing, in the present and in perpetuity because that is the opportunity cost.
Nobody would choose $50 million in cash to reject the water because the money only has value if you take the water.
But hypothetically, if the value and the price could be finitely defined, a "fair trade": let's say 10 apples and 1 watermelon are each worth 10 utility units. Price still can't equal the value. We don't eat utility units. The watermelon inherently provides a different value than the apples. An apple isn't a substitute for a watermelon.
I think this is my long winded way to conclude that trying to compare everything is apples and oranges, but somehow we still try to give it a dollar amount.
This is a stupid comparison, but Mojang/Minecraft was acquired for 2.5 billion in 2014.
Arguably the most popular video game of all time, which has brought joy to hundreds of millions of people for years and years, was valued at 1/20th of an AI startup that will soon disappear into irrelevance.
While Minecraft is just a game, I'd argue it has more societal value than Cursor. The way things are valued is nonsensical to me.
Exams are definitely in person. Homework is not graded, except that once a week, one problem would be randomly selected from the homework for an in class quiz. The numbers would be changed up.
From my perspective, you didn't really have a choice but to be able to solve all of the problems on the homework unless you wanted to gamble failing that week's quiz. The answer key and AI are always available, but the learning got to happen on my terms. It was a good balance. And grading for the professor was relatively light since it was only one problem per student.