Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Comments on Should we allow answers generated by ChatGPT?
Parent
Should we allow answers generated by ChatGPT?
We got our first (mostly) ChatGPT answer in our community. Also, a question includes an adapted ChatGPT code that does not seem to do the job.
StackOverflow has already banned ChatGPT answers and I am wondering how we should proceed in this case.
From my perspective, we should also ban ChatGPT answers because it is very likely to include subtle errors and lack any citations (ChatGPT actually had the option to answer the question of sources, but this was removed).
What do you think? Should we allow answers generated by ChatGPT?
I want to let you know that today we (Codidact team) posted our default Gen-AI policy. As far as this community is conc …
1y ago
After some more experience from this bot over a couple of months, I would say that we should ban it simply because: T …
2y ago
"Subtle errors" understates the problem. For example, I asked it about uses for std::equalto, and it tragicomically gave …
2y ago
The expectation for all posts is, that a post is always understood as the own work of the poster, who has the copyright …
2y ago
Now that we've had a few of these answers, I really don't like them. It seems there are three separate problems with …
2y ago
It is a relevant but not decisive point whether ChatGPT can produce citations to back up its output (and whether the cit …
1y ago
My oppion is that they should NOT be allowed if they are not checked by a human for correctness and/or 100% copy pasted …
2y ago
Good question, but solid ‘meh’ on the issue. I don't think a preemptive ban is warranted. It's not as if we're being flo …
2y ago
This may be a bit out of left-field, but I don't see anybody else taking the approach. Let's face it, ChatGPT and A …
2y ago
Post
This may be a bit out of left-field, but I don't see anybody else taking the approach.
Let's face it, ChatGPT and AI and all its quandaries are not going away. If we put a ban in, some clever clogs will work out a way to bypass, just for the sake of it. If we allow ChatGPT open slather, the quality of answers becomes hopelessly variable.
I suggest we take the bull by the horns, and put some smarts into the question writing function that, once the question is completed, submits it to ChatGPT. Codidact then inserts ChatGPT's answer and the community are then allowed to try to reword the question so the AI provides a better (more accurate, more precise, etc) answer.
Heck you could even submit the question again to query if there's a better way to write it and get a positive feedback loop going with ChatGPT.
I know nothing about licensing, so this may be expensive. At the same time, the competitive advantage by exploring this niche (before others jump on the wagon - it will happen) may make the expense worth it.
An alternate idea (prompted from a comment) might be to have an official 'ChatGPT' community member, and give mods, or some group created for the purpose, privileges to use that account to write a response (including the text of the question used) as given by ChatGPT.
My reasoning for this approach is that an official use of the AI tech will reduce the noise - whether from the multiple ChatGPT answers given if it's allowed, or the attempts to sneak AI-assisted answers through if it's not - by providing a single AI focus point for each question.
0 comment threads