It’s a proud moment for any parent when their child identifies a logical fallacy in a chatbot’s response. Thanks to a wave of new AI literacy programs in schools, students are now being taught to recognize the flaws in large language models—like hallucinations, biased outputs, and overconfidence. The goal, educators say, is to help kids use AI critically rather than blindly trusting it. But here’s where it gets interesting: What if the lessons in chatbot skepticism aren’t just about technology? What if they’re inadvertently training children to be suspicious of all forms of authority? Imagine a seventh-grader refusing to accept a grade on their history essay because the teacher’s feedback “lacks source diversity.” Or a kindergarten class staging a walkout after their math worksheet fails to pass a Turing test. The consequences could be both hilarious and dystopian. Students might start fact-checking lunch menus (“The cafeteria claims these are ‘chicken nuggets’—sources?”), demanding peer-reviewed citations for homework assignments, and arguing that the school bell is a “predictive text algorithm designed to manipulate our circadian rhythms.” Already, one district reported a spike in students asking their principals for confidence intervals on fire drill times. Proponents of AI literacy insist that critical thinking is the point. But skeptics worry they’re creating a generation of tiny debunkers who will grow up to be professional nitpickers, unable to enjoy a movie without analyzing the plausibility of its plot holes. After all, if you train kids to spot flaws in a chatbot, what stops them from applying that same lens to everything else? The next time you tell your child to clean their room, don’t be surprised if they demand a cost-benefit analysis first. So, is this truly about AI literacy, or are we grooming the most argumentative generation yet? And more importantly, when your child refuses to believe the stove is hot without a peer-reviewed study, will you be proud—or just really annoyed?