4 ms·

I can't read this past the part where he ridicules and trivializes the issue of trust. Can I trust code that comes from StackOverflow? Yes. Not no. YES. That c

I can't read this past the part where he ridicules and trivializes the issue of trust. Can I trust code that comes from StackOverflow? Yes. Not no. YES. That code has been vetted to some degree more than zero. Some human is taking a certain amount of responsibility for posting (an amount more than zero). And I understand the mentality and limitations of the people posting code there. But in point of fact, I don't know anyone who simply constructs entire systems from merely pasted code from StackOverflow, so it's a poor analogy. ChatGPT, by contrast is utterly irresponsible. I don't mind using it to blockbust through certain problems, but the idea of having it write my code and then simply presuming that it works (which all the commentators who laud ChatGPT do-- they just declare that everything is great without seriously testing it) is morally wrong. If I did that I could not be accountable for it. ChatGPT can do amazing things. What it can't do is be responsible for itself. That's why I want Congress to regulate its use. It has always been the case that humanity is divided into people who are comfortable with cheating-- happy to take whatever they can get without being jailed or killed-- and people who believe in a caring and lawful society. ChatGPT is a great gift to the cheaters, and it makes civilization all the more vulnerable.

koheripbal 4y ago
> I can't read this past the part where he ridicules... ...ok, but then you missed the meat of the article.
golergka 4y ago
> Can I trust code that comes from StackOverflow? Yes. Not no. YES. That code has been vetted to some degree more than zero. I've experienced critical production bugs by using the most voted answer on Stack Overflow. Here's the detailed description: https://github.com/golergka/pg-tx#why-use-this-package https://github.com/golergka/pg-tx#why-use-this-package
- yoyohello13 4y ago
  This just proves the point that you should always know what’s going into your codebase. I feel like the people who copy-paste from stack overflow and wonder why their stuff is broken are the same people who think LLMs can just write their whole codebase. It’s laziness masquerade as productivity.
  - golergka 4y ago
    Laziness is a developer's virtue. Find a better way to do your job instead of working hard.
    - therealdrag0 4y ago
      Eh. That’s a saying but it’s not a good one. Building expertise and producing quality takes hard work. Working smart instead of hard is not lazy and calling it lazy feels like redefining the term to be quaint.
- satisfice 4y ago
  That is an exception to a heuristic. Do you think the fact that it is possible to go wrong with Stack Overflow proves there is no difference between a human community, with traceable and persistent identities relating to each other, and ChatGPT, which relates to no one and has absolutely no accountability? I don't believe you think that.

koheripbal 4y ago

> I can't read this past the part where he ridicules... ...ok, but then you missed the meat of the article.

golergka 4y ago

> Can I trust code that comes from StackOverflow? Yes. Not no. YES. That code has been vetted to some degree more than zero. I've experienced critical production bugs by using the most voted answer on Stack Overflow. Here's the detailed description: https://github.com/golergka/pg-tx#why-use-this-package https://github.com/golergka/pg-tx#why-use-this-package

yoyohello13 4y ago
This just proves the point that you should always know what’s going into your codebase. I feel like the people who copy-paste from stack overflow and wonder why their stuff is broken are the same people who think LLMs can just write their whole codebase. It’s laziness masquerade as productivity.
- golergka 4y ago
  Laziness is a developer's virtue. Find a better way to do your job instead of working hard.
  - therealdrag0 4y ago
    Eh. That’s a saying but it’s not a good one. Building expertise and producing quality takes hard work. Working smart instead of hard is not lazy and calling it lazy feels like redefining the term to be quaint.
satisfice 4y ago
That is an exception to a heuristic. Do you think the fact that it is possible to go wrong with Stack Overflow proves there is no difference between a human community, with traceable and persistent identities relating to each other, and ChatGPT, which relates to no one and has absolutely no accountability? I don't believe you think that.