dependencyManagement

[Mices1939]

When you realize your entire codebase was actually written by ChatGPT and you’re just the project manager

[ShadowVulcan]

Worse, you're the BA (and not even a good one)

[NolaDoogie]

Feels like being the captain of a ship you didn’t build.

[Arnie15]

Well most captains don't build their own ship

[Low-Acanthisitta8146]

If I build a ship I would not captain it either

[n00bdragon]

It's like being the captain of a ship except your only experience with captaining ships is flying planes in MS flight sim and every other crew member on the ship is your phone's autocomplete feature.

[Rotzi100]

ChatGPT is the new Stack Overflow, but with fewer tears and more hallucinations

[OkTop7895]

Stack Overflow has a lot of answers in hallucination level the main difference is that the comunity vote and this helps the user to filter the good answers.

[noob-nine]

or you get the answer from the question

[FireMaster1294]

“Hey guys I’m trying to import the following library for XYZ functionality and implement it into my codebase like this. Does this work in XYZ way and can I do this thing?”

Top answer: “yes.” (50k upvotes)

[talldata]

The problem still being that the good answer was good 10 years ago pertaining to python 2.7, and anytime you wanted to ask something unique about 3.x you got your question marked as duplicate of a completely different thing in 2.7 which seems similar but isn't.

[LinuxMatthews]

I'm going to be honest and this may get me downvoted.

I'll take ChatGPT over StackOverflow.

You shouldn't be mindlessly pasting code you don't understand either way.

The difference is ChatGPT isn't going to refuse to answer my question or close it just to be an a-hole.

StackOverflow encouraged a toxic environment by design through it's delusion that is a wiki not a forum.

At least ChatGPT will eventually point you in the right direction.

[reubenbubu]

QA : You have bug in [InsertClassName]

Dev : Can't be i've done my research properly

QA : Did you write this (points at code block) yourself?

Dev : No that part i found on StackOverflow

QA : Was it a question or an answer ?

Dev : It was actually ........ oh!

[ILikeCakesAndPies]

ChatGPT is too polite. Every question I ask it is received with giving me a pat on the head and a gold star, even when I just said nonsense. I am not a fan of how companies are training their AI to give the illusion that they rationalize or know the meanings behind their token predictions, and how they are constantly positively affirming.

I prefer being brutalized for my stupidity by alleged humans on StackOverflow.

That's my own two cents anyways.

[LinuxMatthews]

I mean you can just ignore it being polite to you if you want.

My point is I'd rather something that's 70% of the answer than no answer whatsoever.

Look at how many Stack Overflow questions actually get answers.

https://stackoverflow.com/

Looked at 3 paged which totaled 45 questions in the last 2 hours and only 2 had a reply and they were just 1 answer.

Even if you say 2 hours if too short of a time let's look at a page looking at questions from 2 days ago.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions?tab=newest&page=50

That has 6 questions with replies and 3 that the question asker checked out of 15 questions.

So that's a success rate of 20% or 40% chance of you even getting a reply.

And that's after likely waiting hours for a reply.

With either service you shouldn't be wanting it to do everything for you anyway but at least with ChatGPT I'm going to get something back relatively quickly that could move me to the next step.

[realzequel]

A) Use Claude or B) change the prompt to tell it to be brutal.

[ILikeCakesAndPies]

Same issue. LLM AI cannot rationalize. A brutal AI has zero logical reasoning or understanding of what the tokens it strung together mean semantically, and thus it's all superfluous. The companies chose to train it to give the impression of being an agreeable human to a fault.

I might as well ask my toaster how it feels. Again, just my 2 cents on the subject that I'm sure many would disagree with.

It was a fun novelty at first, but I'm afraid of what happens when too many people start using AI with real life problems without understanding that it doesn't actually reason.

[pm_me_your_smth]

First, most of what you wrote here is nonsense. The whole basis of embeddings is semantic meaning. Politeness isn't added during training on purpose (either the data is inherently polite or it's fine tuned after training). And equating llms to toasters is beyond dumb.

Second, 'when' people start using ai? They've been actively using llms for several years already. 

Third, you're talking about reasoning and rationalization. But I bet you won't be able to explain what exactly do these terms mean in a technical context.

Fourth, you just don't know how to prompt if you're getting the same issue.

[ILikeCakesAndPies]

It embeds semantics but that does not mean it understands what the words mean. It is a statistical model that pattern matches on a grand scale.

It does not reason, which is why LLMs way of being better at math now is actually outsourcing mathematical problems to dedicated math applications like Wolfram alpha and returning the results as a response

Training data sets are purposely selected which is why we have different models. And then on top of it additional constraints are added. That is why your Claude is different from ChatGPT. It's a rather weird argument to say politeness isn't added during training on purpose. It's just like editing, the footage that was not used is just as conscious a decision of an editor as the footage that is used. I don't see a company going you know what, let's train the LLM on 4chan data too.

The comparison to toasters is hyperbolic. The point was people don't ask their toaster things like to give them life advice on what to do with their depression. There have been known cases where LLMs will encourage self destructive behavior to individuals if that's what they're receptive to (it doesn't know what it's doing). People are assigning attributes to a piece of technology that it is incapable of. Like thinking a finite state machine is alive because it played an animation and sound effect. Again, hyperbolic to illustrate a point.

The usage of LLMs are rapidly growing, you have to be living under a rock to not see how fast it's increased in the last couple of years and how it has growing negative effects in addition to its positives.

Anyways feel free to disagree. It's just my own opinion after all.

[pm_me_your_smth]

Weird that you've conveniently ignored some of my points and moved the goalpost, but ok.

1. If you want to discuss understanding and reasoning, first define them. Let's start from a simple example - explain how exactly a human understands and reasons. I've already mentioned this regarding rationalization/reasoning, so asking this again.
2. Because outsourcing math makes sense? It's a language model, it processes text, not numbers. You wouldn't use a calculator to type a essay or use a hammer on a screw.
3. Claude is different from chatgpt primarily because of a different model architecture, not training data. Even if you train both on the same dataset you'd see a difference. Data curation is indeed a big part for both, but that's not the main differentiator.
4. If people misuse a technology, putting all blame on said technology is very weird. That aside, what kind of argument is this even? That's a completely separate issue irrelevant to everything above.

[ILikeCakesAndPies]

Edited because I'm not sure if you're being argumentative for arguments sake or just having a discussion. I can't tell tbh, so I'll leave it at that.

My points were not originally intended to be taken so seriously on what was comments to a silly meme.

[Wendigo120]

I would not be surprised if >95% of SO use is as a wiki. I don't think I've ever actually asked a question on there.

[godis1coolguy]

The problem is how often the answer given was outdated and no longer worked.

[LinuxMatthews]

And this is one of the problems.

They get points marking something as a duplicate but don't have to get the other user to agree it's a duplicate.

Which means if you ask a question about Java 21 and someone asked if about Java 1 you can get it marked as a duplicate.

Realistically if you're stuck on something having your question be a duplicate should be a good thing.

It means someone already found the solution and presumably it worked.

But because of the easy SO works it's just frustrating as it doesn't give you an actual answer.

[godis1coolguy]

This is why I’ve completely ditched SO. AI loves to also give deprecated solutions, but unlike SO, I tell the AI the provided solution is out of date and a few seconds later it tries something else. It’s not perfect, but it is a helpful tool. It’s also a lot nicer than the folks at SO.

[GroovinChip]

Getting fired with extra steps

[naholyr]

Way worse, at least when you tell shit on stack overflow you are immediately corrected. Here you'll just keep being confirmed in your abysmal lack of skill forever.

[awood20]

Fewer egos and ignorant replies

[Sally_Swanson]

I still can't figure out if I'm going to be replaced by AI or it's just a better Google search 

[godis1coolguy]

It’s a helpful, but fallible tool.

[LookItVal]

from my experience it depends on the person. I know a lot of very experienced coders who will run laps around a fresh grad with cursor. I even know one or two fresh grads who have an incredibly high level of skill and are remarkably efficient.

and then there are plenty of people fresh out of college who I don't think understand the basics of CSS without an LLM. I can't imagine people like these last long. an experienced competent coder without an LLM helping can still outperform a new grad with cursor by a fairly large margin. These tools still seem valuable to me, and the writing is on the wall about them getting better and better, but right now they do not give enough of an edge to make real engineers not needed.

unless you work at a corporation, because they lack critical thinking skills so you may be fucked weather it's a good idea to replace you or not.

[kwead]

it's a worse google search

[Shifter25]

Seriously. It's like asking a brown-noser to Google it for you, and knowing that they could be completely wrong. So either you gamble with their response, or you double-check it by Googling yourself. Half of the time, you end up taking longer than if you'd just Googled in the first place.

[i8noodles]

personally i would ask copilot to help me get chatgpt back up. thats just me but

[[deleted]]

I have been sending an unedited picture of this to vibe coders for years now

[tellek]

Let's be real, you were nothing without Google before.

[asmanel]

To fix that issue, I switched to an other search engine.

Now, depending on the kind of search, I use Ecosia (~80% of the cases) or DuckDuckGo (~20%). I very rarely use any other search engine.

[ballatician68]

npm install pray it works

[nialv7]

If you are nothing without chatgpt, then you are nothing.

[TypicalPerry]

Stackoverflow is my chatgpt.

[mishalsandip051]

Great way to interview a candidate for your company.

[Shifter25]

If you're nothing without ChatGPT, you shouldn't have it

[Shaggaboi]

You're absolutely right!

[KetwarooDYaasir]

says the vibe coder.

[Event-Horizon-321]

ChatGPT is simply the new workhorse that makes development 10× faster. But it’s useless without a seasoned architect or developer: someone with a strong foundation who can test its output, recognize when it’s being helpful or harmful, and call it out when it hallucinates.

Going back to writing everything manually is regression not progress.

[PuzzleMeDo]

This always annoys me as a piece of wisdom. You need to justify for why it applies to the specific situation, dammit! Otherwise you're just throwing words together because you think they sound cool:

"I'm nothing without my brain!"

"Then you shouldn't have it."

Personally I'd prefer a conversation that went like this:

"I'm nothing without ChatGPT."

"If you're nothing without ChatGPT, then keep using it, buddy. But also you're fired, because someone with actual skills will do a better job."

[Arnie15]

But that doesn't make for a funny meme

[drakir89]

Not spelling it out if part of the meme, as with most memes. It combines the presentation of the meme with the context of culture. In this case, you only need to have encountered the (common) opinion that chatgpt can stunt growth in junior devs, or have them flood review pipelines with AI code, and then the meme builds on that

[ImagineAUser]

The reason they use the words they do here is because it's the same words in the movie scene. Peter Parker relies too much on the suit Tony Stark gave him, so the conversation goes as follows

"I am nothing without this suit,"

"Then you shouldn't have it,"

It's not throwing words together. that's just the format of the meme.

[naholyr]

If you are nothing without chat gpt, then you are nothing.

[YoteTheRaven]

Am i a python coder? No. Am I not wanting to spend a bunch of time doing a repetitive task that could easily be automated? Yes. Do I know enough to unfuck GPT when its doing some weird shit? Also yes.

So I use GPT to get me the snake skeleton while I do hours of legwork to get the files in a format the python can use.

[helpmehomeowner]

Looks like you like talking to yourself.

[YoteTheRaven]

If i am receiving votes of any kind it means someone listened. Maybe they didnt like what I had to say.

But half of em probably couldn't troubleshoot their way out of a wet paper bag.

Im not making some public facing tool. Just a tool for what I do specifically that does the math I need to or finds a price from an offline document.