"Google said this" ... "Wikipedia said this" ... "Encyclopedia Britannica said this"
It is not the same. It needs some searching, reading and comprehension to cite Google etc. Copying a LLM output "costs" almost no energy.
"ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
21–30 of 161 posts
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#22"Google said this" ... "Wikipedia said this" ... "Encyclopedia Britannica said this"
I think the difference is people use those as citations for specific facts, not to logically analyze your code. If you're asked how technical detail of C++ works then simply citing Google is acceptable. If you're asked about broader details that depend on certain technicalities specific to your codebase, Googling would be silly.
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#23I do not use AI for engineering work and never will, because doing the work of thinking for myself is how I maintain the neural capacity for forming my own original thoughts and ideas no AI has seen before.
If anyone gives me an opinion from an AI, they disrespect me and themselves to a point they are dead to me in an engineering capacity. Once someone outsources their brain they are unlikely to keep learning or evolving from that point, and are unlikely to have a future in this industry as they are so easily replaceable.
If this pisses you off, ask yourself why.
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#24I’ve noticed this trend in comments across the internet. Someone will ask or say something, the someone else will reply with “I asked ChatGPT and it says…” or “According to AI…” ChatGPT is free and available to everyone, and so are a dozen other LLMs. If the person making the comment wanted to know what ChatGPT had to say, they could just ask it themselves. I guess people feel like they’re being helpful, but I just d…
Isn't it the modern equivalent of "let me Google that for you"? My experience is that the vast majority of people do 0 research (AI assisted or not) before asking questions online. Questions that could have usually been answered in a few seconds if they had tried. If someone preface a question by saying they've done their research but would like validation, then yes it's in incredibly poor taste.
Let me google that for you was when a person e.g. asked "what's a tomato?", and you'd paste in the link http://www.google.com/search?q=what's+a+tomato
That's not like pasting in a screenshot or a copy/paste of an AI answer, it's being intentionally dismissive. You weren't actually doing the "work" for them, you were calling them lazy.
The way I usually see the AI paste being used is from people trying to refute something somebody said, but about a subject that they don't know anything about.
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#25I’ve noticed this trend in comments across the internet. Someone will ask or say something, the someone else will reply with “I asked ChatGPT and it says…” or “According to AI…” ChatGPT is free and available to everyone, and so are a dozen other LLMs. If the person making the comment wanted to know what ChatGPT had to say, they could just ask it themselves. I guess people feel like they’re being helpful, but I just d…
Isn't it the modern equivalent of "let me Google that for you"? My experience is that the vast majority of people do 0 research (AI assisted or not) before asking questions online. Questions that could have usually been answered in a few seconds if they had tried. If someone preface a question by saying they've done their research but would like validation, then yes it's in incredibly poor taste.
>Isn't it the modern equivalent of "let me Google that for you"?
Which was just as irritating.
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#26I'm starting to run into the other end of this as a reviewer, and I hate it.
Stories full of nonsensical, clearly LLM-generated acceptance requirements containing implementation details which are completely unrelated to how the feature actually needs to work in our product. Fine, I didn't need them anyway.
PRs with those useless, uniformly-formatted LLM-generated descriptions which don't do what a PR description should do, with a half-arsed LLM attempt at summary of the code changes and links to the files in the PR description. It would have been nice if you had told me what your PR is for and what your intent as the author is, and maybe to call out things which were relevant to the implementation I might have "why?" questions about. But fine, I guess, being able to read, understand and evaluate the code is part of my job as a reviewer.
---- PRs littered with obvious LLM comments you didn't care enough to take out, where something minor and harmless, but _completely pointless_ has been added (as in if you'd read and understood what this code does, you'd have removed it), with an LLM comment left in above it AND at the end of the line, where it feels like I'm the first person to have tried to read and understand the code, and I feel like asking open-ended questions like "Why was this line added?" to get you to actually read and think about what's supposed to be your code, rather than a review comment explaining why it's not needed acting as a direct conduit from me to your LLM's "You're absolutely right!" response.
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#27I do not use AI for engineering work and never will, because doing the work of thinking for myself is how I maintain the neural capacity for forming my own original thoughts and ideas no AI has seen before. If anyone gives me an opinion from an AI, they disrespect me and themselves to a point they are dead to me in an engineering capacity. Once someone outsources their brain they are unlikely to keep learning or evol…
Is copy-pasting from Wikipedia an "opinion" from Wikipedia?
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#28I’ve noticed this trend in comments across the internet. Someone will ask or say something, the someone else will reply with “I asked ChatGPT and it says…” or “According to AI…” ChatGPT is free and available to everyone, and so are a dozen other LLMs. If the person making the comment wanted to know what ChatGPT had to say, they could just ask it themselves. I guess people feel like they’re being helpful, but I just d…
Isn't it the modern equivalent of "let me Google that for you"? My experience is that the vast majority of people do 0 research (AI assisted or not) before asking questions online. Questions that could have usually been answered in a few seconds if they had tried. If someone preface a question by saying they've done their research but would like validation, then yes it's in incredibly poor taste.
It is the modern equivalent of "let me Google that for you" except for that most of the people doing it don't seem to realize that they're telling the person to fuck off, while that absolutely was the intent with lmfgtfy.
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#29I do not use AI for engineering work and never will, because doing the work of thinking for myself is how I maintain the neural capacity for forming my own original thoughts and ideas no AI has seen before. If anyone gives me an opinion from an AI, they disrespect me and themselves to a point they are dead to me in an engineering capacity. Once someone outsources their brain they are unlikely to keep learning or evol…
Is copy-pasting from Wikipedia an "opinion" from Wikipedia?
Even that annoys me because who knows how accurate that is at any moment. Wikipedia is great for getting a general intro to a thing, but it is not a source.
I would rather people go find the actual whitepaper or source in the footnotes and give me that, and/or give me their own opinion on it.
Re: "ChatGPT said this" Is Lazy
#30I do not use AI for engineering work and never will, because doing the work of thinking for myself is how I maintain the neural capacity for forming my own original thoughts and ideas no AI has seen before. If anyone gives me an opinion from an AI, they disrespect me and themselves to a point they are dead to me in an engineering capacity. Once someone outsources their brain they are unlikely to keep learning or evol…
Is copy-pasting from Wikipedia an "opinion" from Wikipedia?
No, but it's also equally not a useful contribution. If wikipedia says something then I'm going to link the article, then give a quick summary of what in the article relates to whatever my point is.
Not write "Wikipedia says..." and paste the entire article verbatim.