From Notes to Coding: 12 AI tools every student needs today
Here's a look at how AI is being used by students to keep up, stay focused, and learn more effectively:STUDY MANAGEMENT TOOLSManaging notes, lectures, and time effectively is often a struggle for students. AI-powered platforms like Microsoft Copilot, Notion, and Otter.ai are helping students take notes, convert lectures into text, summarise content, and structure research better.These tools are especially helpful for students with disabilities, offering features like speech-to-text and translation that make learning more accessible.By taking care of repetitive tasks, students are able to focus more on understanding and analysis.SMART CODING HELPERSadvertisementFor students in programming and engineering, AI coding assistants are making a big difference. Tools like GitHub, Copilot provide real-time code suggestions and help debug issues.Cursor allows users to write code using plain language, while Codeium supports intelligent auto-complete and code explanations.These tools save time and allow students to focus more on solving problems than fixing syntax errors.
INTERACTIVE LEARNING AIDSMultimodal tools are expanding the way students engage with content.Google's Gemini API, for example, allows users to input questions through voice, images, or handwritten text.This helps students solve complex problems in subjects like Physics and Math by using visual and spoken interaction, rather than just typing or reading.VIRTUAL ACADEMIC SUPPORTWhen students struggle with heavy topics or long research papers, AI-powered tools like Claude AI provide real-time help.These assistants can summarise dense material, help create citations, and personalise study plans.They also adapt to a student's learning style, making it easier to stay on track during exam season or while handling multiple assignments.AI-GUIDED MENTORING PLATFORMSadvertisementSome platforms now use AI to connect students with suitable mentors based on their interests and academic goals. Tools like Chatgpt, ADPList, Guider AI can help in providing the required mentor support.These tools track progress, recommend next steps, and offer a structured approach to skill development and career planning.This digital mentoring support can be especially valuable for students preparing to enter the job market.While AI can enhance learning, experts caution against overdependence.Relying too much on AI may reduce critical thinking and raise concerns around academic honesty.Students are encouraged to use AI as a support system -- not a replacement -- and always verify information for accuracy.Striking a balance between AI tools and human learning will be key to long-term success.Tune InMust Watch
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Time of India
Can too much AI backfire? Study reveals why ‘AI-powered' products are turning buyers away
The AI Label: A Bug, Not a Feature? So Why the Mistrust? From Boon to Burden You Might Also Like: AI might take your job, but ignoring it could too: Microsoft links performance reviews to AI usage For all the bold claims about artificial intelligence revolutionising the future, a new study suggests that the buzzword 'AI' might be doing more harm than good—especially when it comes to convincing customers to make a purchase. Far from being impressed by "smart" devices, many people are actually repelled by to a report from The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), a study published in the Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management reveals an unexpected trend: consumers, particularly those shopping for premium products, are less likely to buy when the product is branded as 'AI-powered.' The study was led by Dogan Gursoy, a professor at Washington State University , who was reportedly surprised by the an experiment detailed in WSJ, participants were split into two groups: one exposed to advertisements emphasizing artificial intelligence, and the other shown ads using vaguer terms like 'cutting-edge technology.' The result? Those marketed with generic tech phrases performed better in terms of consumer interest. AI, it turns out, might be the tech world's equivalent of trying too the study underlines is that people don't necessarily want a product that sounds smart—they just want one that works. As a report from VICE puts it bluntly, 'Does it toast the bread? Good. We did not need an AI to maximize our toast potential.'That attitude reflects a broader skepticism toward AI-branded gadgets. A related survey by Parks Associates, also cited by The Wall Street Journal, found that 58% of the 4,000 American respondents said the presence of the term 'AI' made no difference in their buying decision. More notably, 24% said it actually made them less likely to buy the product, while only 18% said it among the most tech-savvy generations, enthusiasm for AI branding is modest. The Parks survey found that only about a quarter of consumers aged 18 to 44 felt positively influenced by AI marketing. Older consumers were even more wary—about a third of seniors outright rejected products marketed with AI reasons underpin this skepticism. For one, many consumers simply don't understand how AI adds meaningful value to a product. When companies fail to clearly explain the benefit—such as how an AI-enhanced vacuum cleaner is better than a regular one—customers suspect gimmickry over genuine innovation. As VICE quips, 'Don't even bother explaining… I will immediately call out marketing speak—just old school American frontier snake oil with a snazzy tech coating.'There's also the matter of trust. AI-powered products are often seen as surveillance tools cloaked in convenience. Whether it's the fear of a smart speaker listening in or a robotic assistant tracking daily habits, the suspicion that AI devices are snooping looms may have been a brief window when 'AI-powered' labels intrigued consumers—maybe even excited them. But that window appears to have been closing for now. Today, AI branding risks sounding more like a creepy techno-curse than a promise of the report suggests, if marketers truly want to promote AI-enhanced products, they need to stop leaning on the term 'AI' as a standalone badge of quality. Instead, they must return to the basics of marketing: clearly articulating the practical, time-saving, or value-adding benefits a product the end, intelligence alone doesn't sell; especially if it's artificial and unexplained.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
European firms in panic over EU's AI Act, 44 CEOs urge Brussels to pause the law
Over 40 CEOs of European companies wrote a letter to the EU urging Brussels to halt its landmark artificial intelligence act, The EU was already considering mellowing down key elements of the law due to come into force in August. read more The Chief Executives of top European companies, including Airbus and BNP Paribas, are urging the European Union (EU) to halt its landmark legislation regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI). The letter is coming at a time when the regional body is already considering watering down some of the key elements of the law. It is pertinent to note that the legislation is due to come into effect in August. In an open letter obtained by the Financial Times, the heads of 44 major firms on the continent called on European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to introduce a two-year pause on the Act. The CEOs warned that some of the regulations are unclear and overlapping and can threaten the bloc's competitiveness in the global AI race. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The letter noted that the EU's complex rules put 'Europe's AI ambitions at risk, as it jeopardises not only the development of European champions, but also the ability of all industries to deploy AI at the scale required by global competition.' According to The Financial Times, co-signatories also included the chiefs of French retailer Carrefour and Dutch healthcare group Philips. EU facing pressure The regional bloc has been facing intense pressure from the US government and Big Tech, as well as European groups, over its AI Act. With the passing of the act earlier this year, the group was considered the world's strictest regime regulating the development of fast-developing technology. In light of this, Brussels held a crunch meeting with big US tech groups on Wednesday to discuss a new, softened draft of its regulations. The current debate revolves around the drafting of a 'code of practice', which will guide AI companies on how to implement the act that applies to powerful AI models such as Google's Gemini, Meta's Llama and OpenAI's GPT-4. However, Brussels has already delayed publishing the code, which was due in May and is now expected to water down the rules. The EU's tech chief, Henna Virkkunen, on Monday said Brussels is finalising the code of practice ahead of the August deadline. 'We will publish the code of practice before that to support our industry and SMEs to comply with our AI Act'. 'This is a classic example of regulitis that doesn't take into account the most important thing for industry, which is legal certainty', said Patrick Van Eecke, co-chair of law firm Cooley's global cyber, data and privacy practice. According to The Financial Times, the letter from CEOs was organised by the EU AI Champions Initiative — a body representing 110 companies on the continent across industries — said a postponement would send 'innovators and investors around the world a strong signal that Europe is serious about its simplification and competitiveness agenda.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Meanwhile, there is also a separate joint letter signed by more than 30 European AI start-up founders and investors this week, which called the legislation 'a rushed ticking time bomb'. Hence, it will be interesting to see how the EU will respond to the letter.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Bot vs. B.S.: How X is using AI to clean up the feed
Misinformation on social platforms continues to evolve, and so do the tools built to fight it. X (formerly Twitter) has recently introduced a new initiative called AI Notewriter, which allows AI-powered bots to contribute to its crowdsourced fact-checking system, Community Notes. The idea is simple: use AI to speed up the process, but keep humans in charge. AI notewriter on X to tackle fake news. This article explores how the system works, what it means for online discourse, and where it might go next. Community Notes is X's open fact-checking framework that lets users collaboratively add context to misleading posts. Notes only go live if they're rated 'helpful' by users across the political and ideological spectrum. This ensures balance and reduces the chance of bias or agenda-driven moderation. The system's scoring algorithm is open-source, making its decisions transparent. It's this public, consensus-based model that has earned credibility and inspired copycats on other platforms. How the AI Notewriter works The new AI Note Writer API gives developers access to tools for building bots that can draft Community Notes on flagged posts. These AI-generated notes are always labelled as such and must follow the same review process as human-written ones. AI notewriters begin in 'test mode,' where their notes are visible only to a small pool of reviewers. Only after consistent performance can these bots graduate to proposing live notes. Even then, the rule holds: no note, human or AI, gets published unless it's rated helpful by a diverse group of contributors. The real benefit is speed. While human contributors remain central to judgment and quality control, AI can help surface relevant facts faster during breaking news or viral misinformation surges. Impact and safeguards: Openness, fairness, and quality AI notewriters aim to scale up fact-checking without diluting its integrity. X has laid out four principles for the system: Openness: Public API access and transparency in algorithms Fairness: Same standards for AI and human notes Quality: AI must earn publishing rights through testing Transparency: All AI-generated notes are clearly labelled Importantly, AI bots don't get to rate notes, only human contributors can do that. Their notes still go through the same scoring pipeline, and user feedback plays a role in improving future accuracy. Challenges and the road ahead There are still risks: AI-generated notes could inherit bias, be manipulated through adversarial tactics, or miss subtle cultural context. That's why the rollout is being done gradually, with X closely tracking performance and feedback. The bigger picture? Other platforms are also experimenting with AI-assisted fact-checking. If X can get the balance right by blending AI scale with human judgment. It could reshape how social media fights misinformation.
