Timeline for General moderators' strike
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 3, 2023 at 4:45 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | I don't think most of the mods have had a chance to review things yet. I'm off strike - since I'm satisfied with the new guidelines where chatgpt goes, and I think the company understands they made a mistake | |
| Aug 3, 2023 at 4:12 | comment | added | galacticninja | @JourneymanGeek `@Mokubai Are the SU moderators still on strike following the MSE post, Moderation strike: Results of negotiations? | |
| Jun 12, 2023 at 22:34 | comment | added | Señor CMasMas | Wow. I had no idea that this was going on and I support all of you moderators to the fullest. Not only is the output from ChatGPT deceptive guessing but nobody seems to realize that we will all be put out of work by "less than" garbage. | |
| Jun 10, 2023 at 10:32 | comment | added | Ramhound | @mbrig - Most of the questions only take about 5 minutes to research, but it has taken a lifetime of knowledge regarding Windows to answer most of those questions so the individual asking the question understands the answer. | |
| Jun 10, 2023 at 3:10 | comment | added | mbrig | @Ramhound I feel like you are skipping over both the "can" and the "questions that are easily googleable" part of what you quoted. Go ask chatGPT for say, a bash one-liner that counts the number of unique lines in a file that include the word "tomatoes"; and you'll get a "good" or "perfect" answer. But these questions shouldn't be on SU/SO/SE in the first place, as, like said, they're easily googleable anyways. | |
| Jun 5, 2023 at 15:31 | answer | added | Philip Couling | timeline score: -17 | |
| Jun 4, 2023 at 20:16 | comment | added | harrymc | @Ramhound: I have seen answers where ChatGPT got creative and invented commands that don't exist. Its algorithm of chaining words selected by frequency of appearance can give strange results. | |
| Jun 4, 2023 at 18:38 | comment | added | Ramhound | Every ChatGPT answer has something in common. It parses the question and will answer every element of the question. Including addressing irrelevant parts of the question. Most of the time, the information is "accurate" but utterly irrelevant to the actual question. I see the current iteration of AI language models to be the equivalent of 3D movies in the 1980s, it's basically as impressive as those glasses with three panes of specific colors(red, green, and blue) made out of plastic. Reading how "AI" is going to be used to full HR jobs at IBM, i fully expect, a full reverse course in a year | |
| Jun 4, 2023 at 11:39 | comment | added | NotTheDr01ds | @harrymc "They even got upvoted because they seemed informative." - Exactly. It's far too likely for a bad GPT answer to get upvoted just because it sounds helpful or informative. I've seen bounties awarded to GPT answers even though they didn't answer the question, because no one else provided an answer and the OP was just "thankful" for the "attempt to help." | |
| Jun 4, 2023 at 10:48 | comment | added | harrymc | I have seen on SU a user (account since removed) who answered in a very short time 5 posts, all answers full of weakly related information but with no solution for the poster or just plain wrong. They even got upvoted because they seemed informative. Allowing ChatGPT will mean that anybody can answer as many posts as he has energy for doing copy-paste, and the upvotes will surely exceed the downvotes. This for sure will mean pure data pollution for SU. | |
| Jun 4, 2023 at 5:34 | comment | added | Ramhound | @Destroy666 - Everything I know about OpenAI (specifically ChatGPT) is from flagging the absolute trash answers generated by ChatGPT. I also know it takes a lot of effort for OpenAI to generate production ready code, specifically enough knowledge, to actually just write the code yourself so it’s not that helpful. The code I have seen on SO that’s been generated by ChatGPT hasn’t been impressive | |
| Jun 4, 2023 at 1:06 | comment | added | Destroy666 | @Ramhound I seriously question if you have any knowledge about AI models if you think they can't answer lots of well-formulated software or hardware related questions in 2023... If you think you've been catching most of them before the rule change, you're also likely wrong, it's very easy to get an answer and change the wording, if you can speak English. I've seen a bunch of potential coding answers like that on StackOverflow when reviewing. It's pretty much impossible to detect then if it's an inaccurate answer due to lack of user's knowledge or because they copied code from ChatGPT | |
| Jun 4, 2023 at 0:47 | comment | added | Ramhound | @Destroy666 - “ChatGPT answers can be good/perfect, but mostly for questions that are easily googleable by humans as well anyways.” - I seriously question your ability to detect quality contributions if your experience is that OpenAI generated contributions are “good” or “perfect” because I haven’t seen a single generated contribution by OpenAI that even answers the question that was asked let alone the fact it certainly wasn’t “good” and wasn’t “perfect” and I have identified and reported hundreds of generated contributions. | |
| Jun 3, 2023 at 19:07 | comment | added | Destroy666 | ChatGPT answers can be good/perfect, but mostly for questions that are easily googleable by humans as well anyways. What this changes is mainly causing more plagiarism to stay on the network, as bad/inaccurate answers can be removed for other reasons anyways. | |
| Jun 3, 2023 at 16:39 | comment | added | harrymc | My experience with ChatGPT answers on our site has shown that it has just about the same chance of coming up with a good answer as an infinite number of monkeys typing randomly on typewriters for an infinite time. I detect such answers by the fact that they simply make no sense, although they seem well-written. | |
| Jun 3, 2023 at 9:56 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | Ugh. There's a lot more going on. I might need to fill in the other mods | |
| Jun 3, 2023 at 7:34 | history | became hot meta post | |||
| Jun 3, 2023 at 6:38 | comment | added | Ramhound | I would rather just downvote the OpenAI garbage. It will take longer to prevent, additional contributions from plagiarist that use OpenAI derivatives, but it’s more effective than doing nothing. As always I will judge the contribution not the user. A perfectly worded answer with hundreds of characters, proofread by Grammarly, has less than 0.01% OpenAI detection. | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 20:44 | comment | added | Mokubai Mod | I'm definitely not fond of being told that we are not allowed to try and figure out if people are using ChatGPT which as far as I'm concerned is essentially plagiarising some idiot on the Internet who just writes garbage for a living. The worst offenders are generally more active than normal users and could quickly turn the sites into a mess of wrong answers to worse questions. All they have to do now is tell us not to investigate or prevent sockpuppet voting and all the humans might as well pack up and let the chatbots talk and vote at each other. | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 19:57 | history | asked | JdeBP | CC BY-SA 4.0 |