Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

openletter.mousetail.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 120 posts

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#91

Post by pixl97 »

slowhadoken wrote: post #41

ChatGPT isn’t AI, I really wish people would stop calling it that. It tricks people into thinking something magical is happening. There is still only human generated content and ChatGPT scraped it.

And this folks is the AI-Effect in actions.

ChatGPT is AI. It is a human level general intelligence, no, and we're likely very lucky for that.

Humanity is going to have to accept that the words we used to define AI were far too imprecise and don't reflect how development of AI is actually occurring. If you want to argue the language of it, then demand we make new, testable, and scientific definitions for the capabilities of computer intelligence. Any less, and all we'll hear is the sound of scraping goal posts as they get moved further and further.

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#92

Post by pixl97 »

kristopolous wrote: post #40
koheripbal wrote: post #6

Why? If the answers are good, leave them.

Because the system isn't confirming the answers. Let's assume we have the final form AGI. If it doesn't confirm the claims are accurate then it falls under the same flaw as humans who don't confirm. If it's a bunch of untested, unconfirmed results that are statistically pretty decent, this doesn't really reduce the amount of work. That is the same misplaced enthusiasm that developers tend to do when they fetishize ne…

>Because the system isn't confirming the answers.

Do we have any evidence that users confirm the answers? In general the conformation is in the end users following up and saying this works/doesn't work.

Now, this gets more problematic when 'bots' follow up and says it works, but that is going to be a massive problem in detecting that's the case unless they are doing it far more than a human could.

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#94

Post by pixl97 »

lamp987 wrote: post #63
EGreg wrote: post #11

So it has been only a couple months and AI spam is causing problems for submissions in communities from StackOverflow to Sci-Fi publishing to photo contests. The AIs can overrun all the CAPTCHAs too. So, this is just the beginning. What will happen next year on HN? Anyone can deploy a swarm of bots

dead internet will become real

It was a misnomer calling it 'dead internet theory', Thoughty2 correctly renames it 'dead internet prophecy'.

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#95

Post by pixl97 »

skilled wrote: post #13

It is most certainly a predicament. If people feel like they can freely post ChatGPT content, it adds enormous strain on making sure that the solution provided actually works. This then has to be done by moderators (with experience) or other users who land on the site. If it is the latter, people might get frustrated that answers are wrong, devaluing SO's value overall. In a nutshell, allowing AI in its current itera…

So, prove it's AI content, that's going to be the hard part with a ton of false negatives.

I look at it the other way, AI answers should be fine where tools like Code Interpreter are in use and they can provide a verifiable solution. At the end of the day people copying from SO are generally looking for something that works, and the problems of this being best practice can be fought out by the people down thread.

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#96

Post by pixl97 »

EGreg wrote: post #14
eimrine wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is for chatting but SO is for storing answers. Why moderators can not de-hallicinate the answers? Probably it needs some time before SO will became the only source of autogenerated answers on SO.

Why can’t moderators on HN deal with a torrent of AI generated comment? Mission has been f**ing accomplished and now we will be enjoyin the xkcd dystopia: https://xkcd.com/810/

Imagine the AI dystopia being like the entire Earth. We are only about a few shovel fulls deep. But don't worry, tech companies are spending billions of dollars on tools to dig even faster.

Buckle up, because it's going to be a wild ride.

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#97

Post by sholladay »

crazygringo wrote: post #17

Either answers are good or not. It doesn't matter if they're generated by a 13-year-old in their bedroom, someone studying CS at university, a well-respected IC at a top tech company... or an AI. If answers are good, keep them. If they're bad, downvote them. If they're redundant or off-topic or gibberish, delete them. And to those asking why you would ever want AI-generated content on StackOverflow when you could jus…

The volume is the real problem, as you mentioned. People are worried about AI content because it’s hard to even review it or accurately detect it. I can’t remember the last time I looked at my email spam folder, even though I’m sure there are some useful messages in there, mostly because it would take too much time to go through it. If the inbox starts being filled with AI content that isn’t quite spam, it might start feeling like a chore to go through too, again mostly because of the volume. We will have to see if the existing mechanics of unsubscribe, report, downvote, etc. will be sufficient to hold back the tsunami.

My guess is the spam detection arms race will evolve into a content moderation arms race and we will end up with advanced AIs filtering and moderating content for us, to varying degrees of success and things like email, forums, and Q&A sites will become increasingly hands off.

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#98

Post by rich_sasha »

LelouBil wrote: post #43
nologic01 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If answers are good, keep them. If they're bad, downvote them. If they're redundant or off-topic or gibberish, delete them. Yeah, lets us keep providing free labor to help train somebody else's models, improve somebody else's infrastructure so that they can even more effectively dominate.

I think you missed the fact that you are mainly doing this to make other users find relevant answers, on a free website. Or maybe you would want to pay for a version of stack overflow that is only curated by employed people ? But I guess you would lose much content.

As you say, Stack overflow is free to use. ChatGPT isn't and its scraped web training corpus is not available.

So it's not symmetric

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#99

Post by nologic01 »

Me1000 wrote: post #86
nologic01 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is that any different than providing free labor to help someone learn how to build the next [X] so that they can more effectively dominate? Its an absurd equivalence. A human can never "dominate" no matter how much they learn. Training for free a closed, for-profit private enterprize infrastructure that will eventually make your preferred free collaboration platform obsolete is like the ultimate of naivete (or…

It's not really an equivalence, if you remove the sensationalism, it's just a point that the free work is already being provided. Put more succinctly I'm making two points: 1) The free work is already being done. 2) StackOverflow has been crawl-able since forever. You'd have to address both of those problems before the concern that you're raising becomes relevant. Banning the posting of new generated content doesn't…

Ok, it makes more sense now. But you need to consider the significant incremental benefit to the model training process when creating labels exactly where the model underperforms.

The baseline you mention is already an issue that is being debated hotly.

My comment was that humans reviewing and fixing new AI content is exactly not what should be done in the current circumstances.

Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content

#100

Post by rich_sasha »

isoprophlex wrote: post #5

I don't understand why you would, for the forseeable future, want to allow AI generated content on SO. Not with the current state of the art in generative AI. If I want an AI generated answer, with all the pros and cons specific to LLMs, I'll just open chatgpt or turn on copilot... SO answers (used to be) in an entirely different league in terms of trustworthiness. I'm totally on board with this moderator strike. Edi…

There could still be value, if ChatGPT is right 60% of the time, there is still value in someone filtering that down to the correct answers.
Post reply on HN