4 ms·
> They don’t really understand what they’ve just copied and presented as an answer to a question. > Content posted without innate domain understanding, but wri
by rpastuszak 3y ago
> They don’t really understand what they’ve just copied and presented as an answer to a question.
> Content posted without innate domain understanding, but written in a “smart” way, is dangerous to the integrity of the Stack Exchange network’s goal: To be a repository of high-quality question and answer content.
Tricking our bullshit detectors (eg cues present in the text or implied context) is the biggest problem I have with usefulness of AI generated content.
I wrote the Medieval Content Farm (https://tidings.potato.horse/about https://tidings.potato.horse/about) as an excuse to talk about this (and cope), although people focus more on the fact that I present it as a joke.
- sebstefan 3y agoI haven't seen an example of that being an issue on stackexchange yet I don't see the end goal making a bot that answers questions on SE. It doesn't make money. Maybe to get points, but once you're past every point threshold there's no reason to keep doing it, and it happens fairly quick. Accounts don't get sold to advertisers like on reddit. You'd at most do it once, and for the very narrow niche of people who'd want to boost their SE points? Maybe you're shooting for the leaderboard but if that's the case... you'd get noticed, wouldn't you? I could see some kids doing it, if that's the big threat they're facing then it doesn't warrant a blanket ban on LLMs. I care about 1) spam, 2) answer usefulness. Not how the answer was written