Cluely and the Rise of AI Cheating

We explore how Cluely, founded by Chungin “Roy” Lee—a 21‑year‑old suspended from Columbia University—recently raised $5.3 million in seed funding from Abstract Ventures and Susa Ventures. The platform positions itself as an “AI tool to ‘cheat on everything’”: from exams and coding interviews to sales calls and meetings (TechCrunch). What began as Interview Coder for bypassing LeetCode has since expanded into a broader assistant that monitors screen and audio to feed real-time suggestions through a hidden browser window (NDTV).

A Provocative Manifesto vs. Ethical Alarm Bells

Cluely boldly compares itself to past innovations once considered cheating—like calculators or spellcheck—and declares the future will value “leverage over effort” (The Times). However, privacy and integrity experts warn that normalizing AI‑assisted dishonesty could corrode trust across education and workplaces (eWeek). A Business Insider trial noted performance issues—hallucinations, lag, and privacy risks—making Cluely unreliable in its current form (Business Insider).

Market Momentum and Social Backlash

Despite criticism, Cluely claims $3 million ARR and boasts around 70,000 users, with a $20/month Pro tier (Financial Content). Its founder’s provocative launch video went viral, compared by some to Black Mirror dystopia (TechCrunch). The mix of controversy and novelty has sparked both investor excitement and ethical scrutiny.

What This Means for Education and Corporate Policy

As Cluely and similar “cheat‑tech” tools emerge, educational institutions and certifiers may need to redesign assessments: emphasizing authenticity through oral exams, in-person evaluations, or AI-inclusive methods. Employers may need robust monitoring during virtual interviews. Beyond policy, there’s a deeper cultural shift—a need to reaffirm the value of honest learning in an increasingly AI‑augmented age.

---

FAQs

1. Is Cluely legal and allowed?
Legality depends on jurisdiction, but most universities and employers explicitly prohibit unauthorized AI‑assistance. Cluely operates in a gray area—it doesn’t break laws outright but conflicts with academic and professional integrity policies (LinkedIn, TechCrunch).

2. Can current anti‑AI cheating tools detect Cluely?
Existing detection systems (like Turnitin AI Checker or GPTZero) are unreliable, with high rates of false positives/negatives. Cluely’s real-time, hidden nature increases its detection difficulty (eWeek).

3. What alternatives exist for educators?
Institutions are pivoting toward project‑based learning, oral defenses, secure proctoring, and AI‑aware assessment models to foster integrity while leveraging AI constructively.

---

🧭 Conclusion: A Defining Moment for Integrity

Cluely’s funding round isn’t just a startup success story—it’s a signpost. We stand at a critical intersection: will education systems evolve ethically, or be outpaced by exploitative cheat‑tech? As AI capabilities grow more sophisticated, it’s our collective responsibility—educators, technologists, policymakers—to redefine integrity for the AI era.