this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
8 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

17028 readers
85 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Does it tell you to Google the problem and then downvote you?

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Hence recursion since Google just takes you back, which leads to stack overflow because there is no exit condition.

[–] kiwiheretic@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

That sounds so StackOverflow

[–] lazyvar@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well that explains why they did a 180 on their "no AI" rule, which has the mods in a tizzy.

Who knows, maybe it'll cut back on the toxicity in the sense that you don't have to interact with toxic people ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] kiwiheretic@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Like toxic mods

[–] groucho@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That would be pretty easy.

return "Why are you even trying to do it this way?\n$link_to_language_spec\nThis should be closed.;

[–] iByteABit@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Meanwhile language spec:

  • Extremely high level description along with some implementation details you don't care about

  • function signature

[–] groucho@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] iByteABit@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I love how it was obvious what language I'm talking about without saying anything specific

[–] kiwiheretic@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

I understand Google and Microsoft getting into it as it makes sense as a "better" Google search but for StackOverflow that sounds like they have just given up on their current platform.

[–] TheCee@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Nice choice of logo colors, btw.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

I feel like a better solution is to have a community answer as generative AI to every new question and have folks upvote or downvote it like normal.

[–] programmer@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

They only had to improve the search and kept it a human platform!

[–] little_hoarse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good way to kill your own platform, the whole point is to ask questions to real people

[–] wagesj45@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

I thought the point was a mental BDSM exercise where you come to others for help and are instead punished for your ignorance.

[–] CeeBee@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It really puts their stance on "no AI generated answers" in a different light.

Basically, "no AI generated answers unless we do it".

[–] lightsecond@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Well, using ai-generated answers to train their own ai would bring down the quality of answers and worse quality means lesser money. Don’t you want them to make any money??!!

[–] ImpossibleRubiksCube@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Clearly this guy has never actually asked ChatGPT for a working code sample.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've gotten really good results asking chat gpt for programming help. Problem is that it's wrong like 10% of the time, and when it's wrong it's very confidently incorrect. That wasn't a problem for me because I knew when it was wrong and could course correct it and get the correct solution and it still saved me time and helped me eventually get to the right solution. But if someone who's still getting started is trying to use chat gpt to learn, they could easily be mislead because they won't know when its output is wrong.

[–] ImpossibleRubiksCube@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed, but for my questions it's been wrong around three fifths of the time when taken literally.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Definitely depends on the type of question. I find for documentation type questions I get the 90% good answers, like how do I do something with this library, it's good, which makes sense because that libraries documentation is probably in the training data. But for more open ended questions, like how do I solve this problem, I see similar performance to what you're saying. I think it's a good retrieval and synthesises tool which can really save a ton of time if you already have a high level plan of action and just use it to fill in some specific details.

[–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

I use ChatGPT frequently for programming and I've found it to be pretty good.

The key is using it conversational nature as this gets better results.

Start simple and expand. You can't just ask it wrote huge chunks of code.

[–] kiwiheretic@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed. I got ChatGPT to convert python code to JavaScript and I got a buggy code sample back with new bugs.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I've found it great for asking documentation questions. It saves me a ton of time having to search through documentation myself. The problem is when it encounters something it doesn't have information on, it'll just confidently make shit up, and if you're not enough of an expert to recognize when that happens, you can be mislead. It still saves me time, but I use it as a recall tool to get me started when I'm learning to do something new, I'd never use the code it puts out without reading through it line by line. I'm also experienced enough to know when it's wrong and how to refactor its examples. People new to programming could get set down the wrong path by over relying on gpt to teach them.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I look forward to the AI trend fizzling out. It's only slightly less silly than the cryptocurrency trend was.

[–] kiwiheretic@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AI exists because not everyone frequents a low toxicity forum like Lemmy.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

This artificial pseudointelligence exists because there's the “gee whiz, that's cool” of a computer talking like a person, and a bunch of hype chasers looking to cash in. Much like cryptocurrency before it, and the dot-com boom before that, there is little substance to it, and most of it will be commercially irrelevant a decade from now.

[–] Deely@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do we have a term for combination of enshittyfication and LLM?

[–] maiskanzler@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Maybe add NFTs into the mix too. But don't tell wsb and the GME gang.