3 ms·
>Crucially, those have context around them Often incorrect context, incredibly biased context (no you don't know what you want, here's a complete misdirection)
by waboremo 4y ago
>Crucially, those have context around them
Often incorrect context, incredibly biased context (no you don't know what you want, here's a complete misdirection), or just plain outdated. So basically the same thing as ChatGPT.
People who blindly copy and paste and ship are always going to do that. Everyone else isn't. It's really that simple.
- latexr 4y ago> Often incorrect context, incredibly biased context And as you learn more from different sources, you get better at identifying them. > or just plain outdated Which you can plainly see by looking at the date of publication. In the case of Stack Overflow, it is common that popular questions have newer answers which invalidate old ones and replace them at the top. > People who blindly copy and paste and ship are always going to do that. Yes, they will. You seem to agree that is bad. So wouldn’t it follow that it is also bad that the pool of people doing that is now increasing at a much larger rate?
- waboremo 4y agoSure, but do you have a solution to the problem that doesn't also hinder those who are using both StackOverflow and ChatGPT for "good"? Without a solution we're just whining about bad actors existing.
- sumtechguy 4y agoWhat I can find a bit more 'scary' is do they even need a deep understanding of it? ChatGPT will get it 'pretty close' and probably many times correct (as well as wrong). But if it is 'mostly right' then does it matter? Which is even more philosophical. As long as they can read the code and it does it like 95% right it may be just fine and they can fix it later? Heck they could even ask chatgpt what is wrong with it...
- prerok 4y agoAgreed. Expecting people to understand context from StackOverflow is the same as expecting people to understand what they were given by ChatGPT.