Just use it to replace stack overflow. That was never a good thing. ;)
It was and is a good thing. I think it’s a huge problem that when it fades away future next generations of AI will not be able to learn from it. And the culture at that point will be to depend on AI instead of having sites like those, so even getting it back isn’t going to work. Honestly I think maybe we need a new job: “experts” who just do some fun highly thematic stuff and post results online to train AI.
Scientists don’t work on mundane problems. AI need training to solve mundane tasks. Just take stackoverflow as the literal example. It’s not science. We might need a new profession to produce training material for arbitrary areas of expertise, not limited to research level topics. A job like this might be talking about such topics on a searchable forum, for example. Each post can be evaluated by a separate AI system to assign score points to it. I don’t know whether this sounds more dystopian or fun. It’s definitely not that far from social credit systems.
As a computer science professor, you are giving us scientists way too much credit. Most articles we produce are basically just: hey, you can use this framework/use this strategy to solve this problem. There is a sad, or maybe not depending on your POV, problem in computer science research that most research doesn’t follow the scientific method.
It was and is a good thing. I think it’s a huge problem that when it fades away future next generations of AI will not be able to learn from it. And the culture at that point will be to depend on AI instead of having sites like those, so even getting it back isn’t going to work. Honestly I think maybe we need a new job: “experts” who just do some fun highly thematic stuff and post results online to train AI.
It’s probably just going to be people who put code online that doesn’t work at all in an attempt to poison AI :(
ChatGPT 3.5 had a lot of bad code. It was still pretty amazing for the time. But it wasn’t at all a coding agent.
It’s truly incredible how far it has come in just a year and especially in two.
I think you just described scientists :P
Scientists don’t work on mundane problems. AI need training to solve mundane tasks. Just take stackoverflow as the literal example. It’s not science. We might need a new profession to produce training material for arbitrary areas of expertise, not limited to research level topics. A job like this might be talking about such topics on a searchable forum, for example. Each post can be evaluated by a separate AI system to assign score points to it. I don’t know whether this sounds more dystopian or fun. It’s definitely not that far from social credit systems.
As a computer science professor, you are giving us scientists way too much credit. Most articles we produce are basically just: hey, you can use this framework/use this strategy to solve this problem. There is a sad, or maybe not depending on your POV, problem in computer science research that most research doesn’t follow the scientific method.