And they can tell it's AI generated... how?
StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
61–70 of 120 posts
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#62It's an ongoing joke about spam bots, SEO spam, etc, that the day they actually post helpful and useful content it's mission fucking accomplished. With "AI" we are one step closer.
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#63So 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
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#64Before jumping to conclusions, be sure to check out this context: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/389582/what-is-the-... TL; DR - the policy is “we can’t tell if something is AI generated, so hard to justify removal on just that basis.” > We recently performed a set of analyses on the current approach to AI-generated content moderation. The conclusions of these analyses strongly indicate to us that AI-genera…
SE has not provided the data here, and what they communicated is a mess. Some of their main arguments are rather dubious and didn't convince the mods.
Keep in mind that moderators have more than just the pure content of the answers available. This is usually not about a single post, but many of them.
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#65The thing that comes to mind when I hear about volunteers withholding their efforts is the "reinstate Monica" protest. I haven't counted how many years it has been, but there are still people with "reinstate Monica" in their Stack Exchange profiles to this day.
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#66Either 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…
haha. no.
answers are not either good or not. it's not binary. there is a lot of nuance and sometimes the questions and followups contain details that can take the answers in a completely new direction.
just telling if an answer is good or not is a lot of work. sometimes it requires and expert to figure it out. when the answers are given by a human and it's a good faith effort both people in the loop benefit from it. when the BS generation is automated there is zero incentive for a human being to even look and correct the answers. what is the incentive to do so?
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#67Either 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…
I generally agree if the content can be kept clean. Certainly, human users will have more to contend with.
There are just so many interesting questions by having chatbots interact with StackOverflow:
What happens when AI-powered accounts are allowed to vote?
What kind of questions might AI-powered accounts be asking or be interested in?
How will the questions/answers/responses change between model revisions?
You can imagine things spiraling out of control. Perhaps there needs to be a chatbot version of StackOverflow to service all the questions that interest chatbots. :P
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a possibility that everything we output is merely a regurgitation of thousands of human answers, ideas, and thoughts we have encountered before. Including this comment of yours. And mine.
I hate this sort of retort since it’s fundamentally meaningless. All atoms that will ever exist were in the singularity and exploded during the big bang to encompass all of the universe, and so we are all just moving along. Ok, so what.
The point of the retort is precisely to point out the meaninglessness when "regurgitation" is extended to include systems with some degree of generalization/extrapolation/discovery capabilities. The expectation set on AI seems to be to break information theory, "it's not original because it can only draw a horse (more accurately than a random guess) due to having trained on information about a horse" or so on.
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#69Either 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…
This doesn't work at scale. Stack overflow as a platform has been handling user generated input via moderators, voting, and testing. This is fine when there are only 26.8 million coders on the planet, most of which aren't posting on stack overflow regularly. With LLM's all of a sudden there is a huge influx of mediocre content on the platform that people can't handle. Inevitably this will erode trust in the platform.…
> This doesn't work at scale.
Sounds like a job for AI
Re: StackOverflow petition to allow removing AI generated content
#70I would be more afraid of AI generated questions rather than answers.