This isn't "leopards ate not face", unless you think the people making the guides are responsible for LLM slop
post
Good post but wrong comm
Might apply to places like Stack Overflow specifically, where the hostility of human interaction made people quite eager to leap to AI instead.
Was SO really all that hostile? I didn’t think so.
It has its ups and downs and back when I added a shit ton of responses I always tried to keep being friendly and helpful. But even back then there were dicks on the platform, and not too little of them. At some point, it shifted and the dicks started to overwhelm everything.
Yes it was, I couldn't post a question that didn't get downvoted and/or ridiculed for how stupid I was for asking the question in the first place.
Then I was always told my question isn't broad enough to even bother asking, so I might as well not ask.
I got told to kill myself and quit programming for asking a beginner question as a kid. Didn't even get my question answered.
It was more that the owners had a very different idea of the site to what most people wanted to use it for, they wanted to create something akin to Wikipedia of code while most people wanted their programming questions answered. I definitely think a lot of the community had an attitude problem, but the wider problem is more that the users and owners were talking about totally different sites for the most part.
I don’t think their ideal was ever realistic to be honest, the main problem I had with SO was less the reflexive rudeness and power-tripping and more that the community seemed a bit delusional about the basic passage of time and the evolution of industry practice. You’d often see a comically obsolete answer as the canonically accepted one, and if you had a question about something even tangentially related to that canonical answer some smarmy little goblin would come along to close it as a duplicate. It wasn’t very good at what it purported to be, much less what most users thought it was for.
I never ever had to interact on SO and similar sites, I use them solely for searching for solutions, and for that they're perfect - and probably provide a significant amount of data for answering questions on ChatGPT etc.
It's not like the internet didn't work as an answering machine before AI. Often you can enter the exact same prompt into a search engine instead and get better answers. But oh no, you have to click on a website and maybe even scroll down a little!
Where did y'all upload your tutorials? Youtube? Newsflash, big corpo benefitted from it already.
<insert the deadpan stare, from every anarcho socialist whatever whoever who had ever critiqued this uneconomic paradigm, that sternly says in its glare "told you so">
Just like today where dead and living artists artists art, is placed in museums, that charge admission
This is such a bad take. Museums pay for the art they show. If they don't, it's because it was donated or on loan. The living artists are compensated, or were happy to give/loan to a museum. The dead artist's art was bought, donated by the artist's family, or loaned. In the cases that the art was looted or stolen back during colonial times, most normal humans want those pieces returned to the rightful owners, because it's theft.
That's pretty much how it works? Either someone pays specifically for an artist's work, or someone might buy it and donate it, or maybe the artist has an exhibition...
The, post is talking about AI involuntarily taking the collective work of the net and then charging a fee to regurgitate it.
The difference is choice and free will

all 25 comments