2 ms·
> Please don't use AI / LLMs (like GPT) to automatically solve a day's puzzles until that day's global leaderboards are full. By "automatically", I mean using A
by neilv 3y ago
> Please don't use AI / LLMs (like GPT) to automatically solve a day's puzzles until that day's global leaderboards are full. By "automatically", I mean using AI to do most or all of the puzzle solving, like handing the puzzle text directly to an LLM. [...] (If you want to use AI to help you solve puzzles, I can't really stop you, but I feel like it's harder to get better at programming if you ask an AI to do the programming for you.)
If the writer wants to pollute their own event with this weak distinction, they can. My concern is that it's just feeding confusion and rationalizing about cheating in other areas.
Perhaps throughout the next 5 years it will be a cliche to hear "I didn't use the AI to cheat; I only used it as an aid." from cheaters.
- PeterisP 3y agoThing is, we'd expect people to apply a reasonable standard workflow for such tasks, to program as they normally do. Already for quite some time at least for some people that includes IDE with integrated documentation, templates, boilerplate generation, smart autocomplete and refactoring, and some time soon - if not today - for some people that would include IDE with integrated documentation, templates, boilerplate generation, autocomplete and refactoring that utilizes LLM/AI models to do that to a higher level. And that's not "cheating" any more than a carpenter switching from a hammer to a nailgun when building sheds, even at a shed-building contest.
- puchatek 3y agoOf course it would be best to just ban AI. But there's no way to enforce it. An announcement of a ban using strong language will just trigger a certain kind of people to demonstrate how little they feel that the rules apply to them. This wording here at least might lead to some introspection.