3 ms·

I use chatgpt as a rubber duck who I’m suspicious of. Way too often it just comes up with fictional features

duxup 3y ago
I get wrong answers too, but they're pretty easy to figure out fast and if I rephrase I get what I need. It's not like I'm not validating SO answers, there's not any extra steps from my SO experience. Also SO likes to give oddly, technically correct, but also hard to work with code sometimes to the point of being unusable and I take someone else's example anyway. ChatGPT is really good at making super generic answers and quick iterations / alterations. ChatGPT's power is often in the "conversation" where I add or take things away or change things "I need to break out X,Y,Z before I render it because..." and blamo I get new code. SO has none of that.
s_dev 3y ago
I really don't get this dependence problem. People want information to be 100% accurate? This is the internet -- lies and false claims are the standard. It's up to individuals to corroborate that the info they're looking at is reliable. Google provides a list of relevant results to a keyword search -- every one of those results can be bogus and no one bats an eye. ChatGPT provides text output based on a text input and the text can be bogus. Why should ChatGPT be held to a higher standard than Google?
- SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
  Is entirely possible to hit some search result for a real human had a code hallucination. And to the topic, on stackoverflow that would have been deleted, downvoted or corrected. GPT will tell you it’s right… well, it’ll apologize, offer another solution that could also be wrong and now you are in a loop.
  - s_dev 3y ago
    Only a computer can get stuck in a loop or a person who is insane. It's not like if you ask a person to divide by zero they will fall in to a coma or sit there computing. I 100% believe that ChatGPT can output absolute garbage but for the same reason you don't cite Wikipedia/Google you won't be citing ChatGPT. Just like Wikipedia or Google It's just an excellent starting point to rapidly get a working draft going.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
I’m going to steal that. I’ve been trying to explain to people that GPT is good for subjective things, not object of things. But that didn’t really jive with the programming part that works OK for certain tasks. Then I realized it does and programming is just subjective a lot of the time. You need a right answer but how you get there is open. Using it as a spring board is good advice.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
tomrod 3y ago
Aye. It's a scaffold or first draft at best.

I get wrong answers too, but they're pretty easy to figure out fast and if I rephrase I get what I need. It's not like I'm not validating SO answers, there's not any extra steps from my SO experience. Also SO likes to give oddly, technically correct, but also hard to work with code sometimes to the point of being unusable and I take someone else's example anyway. ChatGPT is really good at making super generic answers and quick iterations / alterations. ChatGPT's power is often in the "conversation" where I add or take things away or change things "I need to break out X,Y,Z before I render it because..." and blamo I get new code. SO has none of that.

s_dev 3y ago

I really don't get this dependence problem. People want information to be 100% accurate? This is the internet -- lies and false claims are the standard. It's up to individuals to corroborate that the info they're looking at is reliable. Google provides a list of relevant results to a keyword search -- every one of those results can be bogus and no one bats an eye. ChatGPT provides text output based on a text input and the text can be bogus. Why should ChatGPT be held to a higher standard than Google?

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
Is entirely possible to hit some search result for a real human had a code hallucination. And to the topic, on stackoverflow that would have been deleted, downvoted or corrected. GPT will tell you it’s right… well, it’ll apologize, offer another solution that could also be wrong and now you are in a loop.
- s_dev 3y ago
  Only a computer can get stuck in a loop or a person who is insane. It's not like if you ask a person to divide by zero they will fall in to a coma or sit there computing. I 100% believe that ChatGPT can output absolute garbage but for the same reason you don't cite Wikipedia/Google you won't be citing ChatGPT. Just like Wikipedia or Google It's just an excellent starting point to rapidly get a working draft going.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago

I’m going to steal that. I’ve been trying to explain to people that GPT is good for subjective things, not object of things. But that didn’t really jive with the programming part that works OK for certain tasks. Then I realized it does and programming is just subjective a lot of the time. You need a right answer but how you get there is open. Using it as a spring board is good advice.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

tomrod 3y ago

Aye. It's a scaffold or first draft at best.