Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
nixCraft's posts Post Back to profile
Top-level
drevil

@nixCraft to be completely fair, I would be incredibly surprised (and I am trying to be charitable due to lack of concrete evidence) if OpenAI hasn't scanned every single SO question and answer ever made already. This was probably made so they would have ChatGPT answers on popular questions and stuff like that, which of course is still bad

6 May at 14:19 | Wall-to-wall | Open on tilde.zone
17 comments
Karrbs
dbread
drevil

@dbread @karrbs @nixCraft I think what you meant to say is that they are actively endorsing OpenAIs involvement 😅, which I guess sure might mean that SO won't go after them, though I don't know if SO has the rights to pursue people on behalf of their users

6 May at 16:37 | Open on tilde.zone
Crafty

@chickfilla @nixCraft 100% this. I get that it's disappointing to see web services sell themselves, but it's absolutely ridiculous to think that OpenAI haven't already crawled every single openly accessible web forum, blog or other source of free information.

6 May at 14:34 | Open on mastodon.social
Dr. Gravitas

@Craftycat @chickfilla @nixCraft

It's not about preventing harm that may have already been done, it's about punishing services that choose to align with them.

6 May at 18:58 | Open on red.fox.yt
drevil
Dr. Gravitas

@chickfilla @Craftycat @nixCraft

To clarify, I don't know that I endorse removing responses really. If you remove the ability to get it from the non-AI source and there's no viable alternative source but the AI companies, then you may be effectively driving users to the AI service. Regardless of whether it succeeds in getting services like Stack Exchange to reconsider, it may still be an outcome in OpenAI's favor. On the other hand, to skip removing the content, but the impact of refraining frim the service would be harder to detect, take longer to become apparent and may not be an effective punishment.

Ensuring the deleted content is available on a more favorable service that hasn't aligned with OpenAI would probably be an important addendum.

@chickfilla @Craftycat @nixCraft

To clarify, I don't know that I endorse removing responses really. If you remove the ability to get it from the non-AI source and there's no viable alternative source but the AI companies, then you may be effectively driving users to the AI service. Regardless of whether it succeeds in getting services like Stack Exchange to reconsider, it may still be an outcome in OpenAI's favor. On the other hand, to skip removing the content, but the impact of refraining frim...

6 May at 19:21 | Open on red.fox.yt
drevil

@DrGravitas @Craftycat @nixCraft I was thinking about that too. The issue I have is that, if this partnership is done to ease the integration of ChatGPT into StackOverflow, they will include ai generated answers first regardless of if people delete their posts or not.

By removing your answers at least you decrease the value of SO, though given the very, very small portion of their user base that cares about this, I don't think it will affect them much.

I guess if you want to give them the middle finger for this, than go ahead, but truth be told, it's unlikely this will cause any significant changes on their behavior. Most people I'd imagine will actually be thrilled about ChatGPT integration, since for a lot of people all that it means is that they might get automated replies without waiting for a human, regardless of the quality of the answers they might receive (assuming they are able to tell if they are bad or not to begin with).

Either way, it's a very bleak future I'm afraid, and the only saving grace I can think of is that the answers become so repetitive and terrible, people just revert back to forums/alterantives to SO. Or, you know, just reading documentation when possible.

@DrGravitas @Craftycat @nixCraft I was thinking about that too. The issue I have is that, if this partnership is done to ease the integration of ChatGPT into StackOverflow, they will include ai generated answers first regardless of if people delete their posts or not.

By removing your answers at least you decrease the value of SO, though given the very, very small portion of their user base that cares about this, I don't think it will affect them much.

6 May at 19:29 | Open on tilde.zone
Artemesia

@chickfilla @nixCraft

That's not the point. Going forward stack overflow will be polluted with a bunch of AI "hallucinated" garbage, where hallucinated means "made shit up in order to produce a plausible answer".

6 May at 15:32 | Open on techhub.social
drevil

@artemesia @nixCraft well, yes, that's what I meant with my last sentence. The point I was trying to make is that the data collection aspect of this would happen regardless, and if you want to be more cynical about this, there's nothing stopping SO from keeping your data after you delete your account. Though if your answers become unavailable on the site after doing so, that would be a reason why since it would hurt the site (aside from the obvious reason of not wanting to be associated with SO ofc)

6 May at 16:01 | Open on tilde.zone
Karsten Johansson

@artemesia @chickfilla @nixCraft That depends on if it can differentiate between code people thought was good, and code people thought was rubbish.

If it focuses only on code that got a lot of upvotes and participation (and then uses some of the points given in the participation) then it shouldn't be any worse than it already is.

Not to say that its bad... but if it hallucinates, it would mostly be because of the extremely high number of bad answers (that thankfully tend to be downvoted and sometimes explained as to why they are bad answers)

Still, the point is pretty clear that those who came up with the good content probably won't get credit, and there would be no reason to bother answering questions there for future questions.

@artemesia @chickfilla @nixCraft That depends on if it can differentiate between code people thought was good, and code people thought was rubbish.

If it focuses only on code that got a lot of upvotes and participation (and then uses some of the points given in the participation) then it shouldn't be any worse than it already is.

6 May at 18:24 | Open on infosec.exchange
Artemesia

@ksaj @chickfilla @nixCraft

Even if we grant your postulates, what value is being created? It would just be regurgitating previous highly voted answers. That doesn't create any capability to produce useful answers to questions without prior history. There's no guarantee that an LLM answer would even be syntactically correct. You also underestimate LLM "AI" propensity to "hallucinate" (or to be blunt, "make shit up so it can respond"). The AI starts from the position that it *will* produce a reply following a certain format, then if it can't find real world priors it invents them. Quite a few attorneys have gotten into deep shit by filing AI generated court docs that referenced prior cases that simply did not exist.

Not to mention the sucking their own exhaust problem when later AIs train themselves up on the garbage produced by earlier AIs.

@ksaj @chickfilla @nixCraft

Even if we grant your postulates, what value is being created? It would just be regurgitating previous highly voted answers. That doesn't create any capability to produce useful answers to questions without prior history. There's no guarantee that an LLM answer would even be syntactically correct. You also underestimate LLM "AI" propensity to "hallucinate" (or to be blunt, "make shit up so it can respond"). The AI starts from the position that it *will* produce a reply...

6 May at 21:45 | Open on techhub.social
cognitively accessible math

@chickfilla @nixCraft I know, right? talk about obvious. Does it filter out the toxic snrk ;)

6 May at 15:55 | Open on mathstodon.xyz
foxy
Andrea Lazzarotto

@chickfilla @nixCraft when you post something to Stack Overflow, you are licensing it with a Creative Commons license.

This open license is explicitly meant to facilitate sharing of knowledge and does not require permission from the author.

When someone decides to release content using an open license (which is great), they can't really complain when other people take advantage of said license.

I shared several of my programs as open source software. I won't get mad if people use them.

6 May at 22:22 | Open on mastodon.social
drevil

@lazza @nixCraft Likewise, if I release my contribution out in the open and then I remove it, regardless if someone has a copy of it or not, I have the right to do so.

Nobody is arguing they shouldn't, nor that they can't. This is more about boycotting SO. Just because you can do something, it doesn't mean you should, and more importantly, it doesn't mean you can't be criticized for it.

6 May at 22:35 | Open on tilde.zone
Go Up