Comment on ChatGPT has a style over substance trick that seems to dupe people into thinking it's smart, researchers found

sj_zero ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  If you need a correct answer, you’re doing it wrong!

  I’m joking of course, but there’s a seed of truth: I’ve found ChatGPT’s wrong or incomplete answers to be incredibly helpful as a starting point. Sometimes it will suggest a Python module I didn’t even know about that does half my work for me. Or sometimes it has a lot of nonsense but the one line I actually need is correct (or close enough for me to understand).

  Nobody should be copying code off Stack Overflow without understanding it, either.

  source

  • sj_zero ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I won't pretend, it can be very useful as long as you know what it is and the fact that very often it will make stuff up out of whole cloth.

    I was trying to figure out how to make a change to a rest program that I use (lotide which I'm posting from, actually) but I don't know anything about rust. So it ended up leading me down the rabbit hole with a library that just didn't exist, and all kinds of routines that didn't exist, but ultimately I did get there. Ended up using regex instead.

    • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      So it ended up leading me down the rabbit hole with a library that just didn’t exist

      LOL damn. I haven’t had that experience myself, but that’s probably because it has more training data on Python than Rust.

      I think the future of AI will be A) more specialized training, and B) more “dumb” components to keep it on track.

      source
• sumofchemicals@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  This hasn’t been my experience. Yes, chatgpt gets stuff wrong, and fairly regularly. But I can ask it my question directly, and can include sample code, and I get an answer immediately. Anyone going on stack overflow has to either google around and sift through answers for relevance, or has to post the question and wait for someone to respond.

  With either chatgpt or stack you have to check the answer to make sure it works - that’s how coding goes. But one I know if it works or not pretty much immediately with fairly low investment of time and effort. And if it doesn’t, I just rephrase the question, or literally say “that doesn’t seem to work, now I’m getting this error: $error”

  source

  • sj_zero ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    When it gets stuff wrong though, it doesn't just get stuff wrong, it gets stuff completely made up. I've seen it create entire apis, I've seen it generate legal citations out of whole cloth and entire laws that don't exist. I've seen it very confidently tell me to write a command that clearly doesn't work and if it did then I wouldn't be asking a question.

    But I don't think that the alternative to chat GPT would even be stackoverflow, it would be an expert. Given the choice between the two, you would definitely want an expert every time.

    • sumofchemicals@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      You’re right that it completely fabricates stuff. And even with that reality, it improves my productivity, because I can take multiple swings and still be faster than googling. (And sometimes might just not find an answer googling)

      Of course you’ve got to know that’s how the tool works, and some people are hyping it and acting like it’s useful in all situations. And there are scenarios where I don’t know enough about the subject to begin with to ask the right question or realize how incorrect the answer it’s giving is.

      I only commented because you said you can’t get the correct answer, and that people don’t check the answer, both of which I know from my and my friends actual usage is not the case.

      source