I got an email ban.
1609 hours logged 431 solved threads
Well, it is important to comply with the terms of service established by the website. It is highly recommended to familiarize oneself with the legally binding documents of the platform, including the Terms of Service (Section 2.1), User Agreement (Section 4.2), and Community Guidelines (Section 3.1), which explicitly outline the obligations and restrictions imposed upon users. By refraining from engaging in activities explicitly prohibited within these sections, you will be better positioned to maintain compliance with the platform’s rules and regulations and not receive email bans in the future.
Is this a joke?
This is an ironic ChatGPT answer, meant to (rightfully) creep you out.
Check the post history. Dude just seems like an ass.
Nah, but the user is. Their post history is… interesting.
So they pulled a “reddit”?
These companies don’t realise their most engaged users generate a disproportionate amount of their content.
They will just go to their own spaces.
I think this a good thing in the long run, the internet will become decentralised again.
I don’t know. It feels a bit like “When I quit my employer will realize how much they depended on me.” The realization tends to be on the other side.
But while SO may keep functioning fine it would be great if this caused other places to spring up as well. Reddit and X/Twitter are still there but I’m glad we have the fediverse.
Individuals leaving don’t have an immediate impact but entire groups of people?
People can see how that worked out for Boeing when many of their experienced engineers and quality inspectors left.
Well, reddit is doing fine so far. Shareholders are happy
Take all you want, it will only take a few hallucinations before no one trusts LLMs to write code or give advice
[…]will only take a few hallucinations before no one trusts LLMs to write code or give advice
Because none of us have ever blindly pasted some code we got off google and crossed our fingers ;-)
It’s way easier to figure that out than check ChatGPT hallucinations. There’s usually someone saying why a response in SO is wrong, either in another response or a comment. You can filter most of the garbage right at that point, without having to put it in your codebase and discover that the hard way. You get none of that information with ChatGPT. The data spat out is not equivalent.
That’s an important point, and and it ties into the way ChatGPT and other LLMs take advantage of a flaw in the human brain:
Because it impersonates a human, people are more inherently willing to trust it. To think it’s “smart”. It’s dangerous how people who don’t know any better (and many people that do know better) will defer to it, consciously or unconsciously, as an authority and never second guess it.
And the fact it’s a one on one conversation, no comment sections, no one else looking at the responses to call them out as bullshit, the user just won’t second guess it.
Your thinking is extremely black and white. Many many, probably most actually, second guess chat bot responses.
Think about how dumb the average person is.
Now, think about the fact that half of the population is dumber than that.
Split segment of data without pii to staging database, test pasted script, completely rewrite script over the next three hours.
If this is true, then we should prepare to be shout at by chatgpt why we didnt knew already that simple error.
ChatGPT now just says “read the docs!” To every question
Hey ChatGPT, how can I …
“Locking as this is a duplicate of [unrelated question]”
Oh I didn’t consider deleting my answers. Thanks for the good idea
BarbraStackOverflow.I’d be shocked if deleted comments weren’t retained by them
I think the reason for those bans is that they don’t want you rebelling and are showing that they don’t need you personally, thus ban.
Of course it’s all retained.
How many trees does a person need to make one coffin…
It’s a metaphor for us killing ourselves in the processes of deforestation, not a story of someone actually making a coffin.
deleted by creator
See, this is why we can’t have nice things. Money fucks it up, every time. Fuck money, it’s a shitty backwards idea. We can do better than this.
Reddit/Stack/AI are the latest examples of an economic system where a few people monetize and get wealthy using the output of the very many.
Technofeudalism
Letting corporations “disrupt” forums was a mistake.
First, they sent the missionaries. They built communities, facilities for the common good, and spoke of collaboration and mutual prosperity. They got so many of us to buy into their belief system as a result.
Then, they sent the conquistadors. They took what we had built under their guidance, and claimed we “weren’t using it” and it was rightfully theirs to begin with.
If i was stack overflow I would’ve transferred my backups to OpenAI weeks before the announcement for this very reason.
This is also assuming the LLMs weren’t already fed with scraped SO data years ago.
It’s a small act of rebellion but SO already has your data and they’ll do whatever they want with it, including mine.
It will not make a difference. The internet is free and open by design. You can always scrape the internet any time. A partnership will do nothing but make it a little bit more convenient for them.
Instead of solely deleting content, what if authors had instead moved their content/answers to something self-owned? Can SO even claim ownership legally of the content on their site? Seems iffy in my own, ignorant take.
They can. It’s in the TOS when you make your account. They own everything you post to the site.
Well I suppose in that case, protesting via removal is fine IMO. I think the constructive, next-step would be to create a site where you, the user, own what you post. Does Reddit claim ownership over posts? I wonder what lemmy’s “policies” are and if this would be a good grounds (here) to start building something better than what SO was doing.
A SO alternative cannot exist if a user who posted an answer owns it. That defeats the purpose of sharing your knowledge and answering questions as it would mean the person asking the question cannot use your answer.
A SO alternative cannot exist if a user who posted an answer owns it. That defeats the purpose of sharing your knowledge and answering questions as it would mean the person asking the question cannot use your answer.
Couldn’t these owners dictate how their creations are used? If you don’t own it, you don’t even get a say.
That’s the point of platforms like SO - you give away your knowledge, for free, for everyone, for any use case. If a user can restrict the use of their answers, then it makes no sense for SO to exist. It’s like donating food to a food bank and saying that your food should only go to white people and not black people.
Everything you submit to StackOverflow is licensed under either MIT or CC depending on when you submitted it.
Regardless of the license (apart perhaps from public domain) it is legally still your copyright, since you produced the content. Pretty sure in EU they cannot prevent you from deleting your content.
it is legally still your copyright, since you produced the content. Pretty sure in EU they cannot prevent you from deleting your content.
They absolutely can, you gave them an explicit (under most circumstances irrevocable) permission to do so. That’s how contracts work.
Unlike in US, and I cannot speak for all of EU, but at least in Finland a contract cannot take away your legal rights.
You can when it comes to copyright. That’s EU-law and anything else would be such a horrible idea that no country would ever set up a law saying otherwise.
If you could simply revoke copyright licenses you would completely kill any practicality of selling your copyrighted works and it would fully undermine any purpose it served in the first place.
While at the same time they forbid AI generated answers on their website, oh the turntables.
"the AI isn’t good enough to answer questions yet, it needs more training "
“YOU HYPOCRITE!! If the A.I is too bad to use then why are you training it!”
Clean the damn mold out of your brain.
