4 ms·
I don't understand why you would, for the forseeable future, want to allow AI generated content on SO. Not with the current state of the art in generative AI.
by isoprophlex 3y ago
I don't understand why you would, for the forseeable future, want to allow AI generated content on SO. Not with the current state of the art in generative AI.
If I want an AI generated answer, with all the pros and cons specific to LLMs, I'll just open chatgpt or turn on copilot... SO answers (used to be) in an entirely different league in terms of trustworthiness.
I'm totally on board with this moderator strike.
Edit: it appears there is a very high false positive rate, making it difficult to distinguish between some answers. So, there's that to consider...
- lordnacho 3y agoIf someone has already put in the right prompt to get the best answer, you will now not have to do that. Also, SO isn't just about getting the right answer, it's also about finding the pros and cons of each proposed solution.
- rafark 3y agoIf the code works just fine, why remove it? For small algorithms it should be good enough.
- NotTheDr01ds 3y ago"Code working" isn't necessarily black-and-white. For a new user (the one asking the question), the code may appear to solve the problem, but may have corner-cases or even security risks. That's entirely possible with user-generated code as well, of course, but GPT/AI allows it to be produced at a much higher rate, with the person who posted the answer often not being capable of (or not caring to) validate or correct it.
- Kuinox 3y agoYes, and SO already have plentiful of sample code that appear to solve the problem, but have huge flaws.
- rich_sasha 3y agoThere could still be value, if ChatGPT is right 60% of the time, there is still value in someone filtering that down to the correct answers.