• SuperFola@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      11 months ago

      People prefer having something generating shitty code and not checking it, instead of asking or searching on internet for a substantially better solution

      • li10@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        69
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Because forum posts are always full of accurate and helpful information?

        In my experience it still makes good suggestions for most things, and is better than trying to phrase things in a way that Google likes, then trawling through irrelevant forum posts.

        It’s only there to make suggestions, so if someone is taking its output without understanding and treating it like gospel then they’re an idiot who’s inevitably going to end up in a world of trouble.

        If you take the suggestion, verify it with documentation, then make sure you actually understand it, chatGPT is a great tool.

        • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          If I’m honest, stackoverflow was always a shortcut for searching documentation to me.

          Simple stuff like how do I turn an InputStream to a String again? I can’t remember it, but I know exactly what to look for, I’m just to lazy.

          For that kind of stuff ChatGPT is almost perfect.

        • Wren@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Because forum posts are always full of accurate and helpful information?

          Not necessarily, but at least there’s much more opportunity for other people to jump in and correct false info or expand upon something. It’s by no means a flawless system, but it’s better than only have one source of information

          • new_guy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            When we use forums there’s also an opportunity to correct (or be corrected) on how we deal with problems.

            I’ve seen a few times people asking how to do X while they’re actually trying to do Y. ChatGPT would gladly direct them to the wrong path.

        • SuperFola@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I didn’t say that people should go on the internet and pick the first forum post either ; that would be like trusting whatever chatgpt is handing you :p

          My point was more on the “people are lazy” side of things, but yeah you have to stay critical of both chatgpt and forum posts.

          • li10@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I agree, I just think that those lazy people will do what they do regardless of where they get their info.

            To butcher a saying; blame the craftsman, not the tools.

            • Aimhere@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              11 months ago

              I half expect that, if enough programmers use ChatGPT-written code verbatim, someday it’s going to lead to Skynet. I mean, what’s to stop ChatGPT from inserting bits of extra code to be used for its own distributed processing botnet?

        • nous@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Sadly there are so many people that take its output as gospel and don’t realise it can be wrong. So is a tool that commonly gets abused by people that don’t know how to use it.

      • gosling@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        You mean shitty code which you can just check and ask them to change in almost real time, over posting your question on SO and waiting for months for an answer?

      • ShortFuse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        People who fail to understand the value of peer-reviewed code are just going to copy/paste bad, but popular, code practices.

        There irony here is that Stackoverflow was considered a common source of copy/pasted code.

      • Aidan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        You can have it generate shitty code and then compare it against examples it finds online to iterate that code. Also, it was trained on the whole internet, including those good solutions, and can often reproduce them on its own. but you have to tell it, explicitly, to do all this to make better code, rather than just asking for the code.

      • ofak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Chatgpt is still a tool and it’s up to the user how to use it. If you google “bolognese recipe” you get one result; if you Google “traditional ragu from Bologna” you get another. Same for ChatGPT.

        • Gork@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          “I’m sorry, as an AI language model this question has been asked too many times and there is insufficient computer resources to handle your request. You’ve been temporarily silenced for 15 minutes.”

      • EatMyDick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        You are delusional and will be left behind if that is your view point. The code is usually largely accurate only needing a few tweaks. Easily one of the most powerful scaffolding and learning tool I’ve used in 25 years. Our developers embracing it are more efficient then ever and passing static analysis, owasp scans, coding standards just fine if not better than cranky old devs who think they couldn’t possibly be helped by a dumb machine.

        • SuperFola@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I prefer being delusional and a cranky old dev, rather than trusting AI by giving all of my workplace code and logic. Powerful? Maybe. Helping you ship products faster? I don’t know ; no metrics have been published about that in controlled settings, and I still think people will get lazy and after some time even the ones that tweaked the code and analyzed it thoroughly will just stop caring.

          Go ahead, jump in that bandwagon, and prove me wrong in 5 years. All I want is proof.

          Also, I didn’t know one could be a cranky old dev after a few years of experience only

      • li10@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think it’s overblown tbh.

        In my experience it still makes good suggestions for most things, and is better than trying to phrase things in a way that Google likes, then trawling through irrelevant forum posts.

        It’s only there to make suggestions, so if someone is taking its output without understanding and treating it like gospel then they’re an idiot who’s inevitably going to end up in a world of trouble.

        If you take the suggestion, verify it with documentation, then make sure you actually understand it, chatGPT is a great tool.

        • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          ChatGPT has been a great tool to help me teach coding. It lets my students with a few months experience write better code, as if they had a few extra months experience, but like you say it’s very easy to get in trouble with it. We had it generate some code to interface a web app with some cloud triggers, and chatGPT suggested we put all the API keys / creds right there in the front end where anyone with “view source” could see them. It made for a really good lesson, actually, on the need to gain experience, understand what code does , and to validate with documentation.

        • Gork@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          trawling through irrelevant forum posts.

          This makes it worth it from just a time savings perspective. Also, describing it as trawling is very accurate lol. It takes a lot of trawling to get the answer you need, and even then sometimes it isn’t right because you’re relying on a single individual’s answer.

      • darkmarx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        I agree that it isn’t as good as it was. The last two updates have definitely decreased its effectiveness for multiple things, not just dev. It is still my starting point when looking for something. It is just not as good as it used to be.

        Obviously, you can’t take what it gives at face value, but you shouldn’t do that from SO either. In general, I see faster results using GPT than I do with Google and SO. You can also extend the responses with any customization or changes specific to what you are trying to do, where you can’t with SO.

        I’m not saying SO is bad. Not by any stretch. I still use it a lot. It just isn’t my starting point anymore.

      • ericjmorey@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Doesn’t need to be good. Just good enough that people need SO less often. If GitHub Copilot gives a code suggestion, I don’t need to look up some syntax or some method I forgot. I’m reminded, and can see that it’s correct. No searching online required.

      • Gork@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s a little more decent than you give credit for. I use it all the time for easy generic subroutines and functions. It struggles a bit with specific, complex requests but is generally pretty versatile as a miniature code assistant. It’s good at catching human errors like loops starting or ending at the wrong specified integer, so I use it as a debugging tool.