AI generated

The Crucible
1

I’m going to update the rules to the forum to ban posting any code or technical information generated by AI unless a human has tested and verified the information.

That doesn’t mean that you can’t use AI to help you “code”, but the AI hallucinate a lot of crap, and when that crap is posted here, it goes into search engines and can easily be mistaken for facts.

It also means that I cannot help people fix AI-generated code. I see that as a feature rather than a bug…

Comments are welcome.

9 Likes
2

I approve.

Especially with ProffieOS, it only confuses people more than anything else.

1 Like
3

I have to say this seems eminently reasonable.

I’m guilty of using AI to help write code, but amazing though the technology is in writing it, it is far from perfect, and I’ve found that when you start testing it, things often unravel quite quickly.

That said, I can’t see why anyone would post it here asking for help if they haven’t tested it first. How would they know it doesn’t work?

4

Maybe I should be more clear: Posting AI generated code that doesn’t work will not be allowed. If you test it, and you find that it doesn’t work, you’re still not allowed to post it.

Also, sometimes people will will see a question, ask an AI, then post the answer, which will also also not be allowed. (Unless the information has been verified by a human.)

Posting AI generated information or code to ask someone else to test it would also not allowed.

It is still permissible to send PMs with AI generated code and information, but please beware that if you send it to me, I will most likely just tell you to try again, but without the AI.

The overall goal is to avoid getting bad information indexed by search engines. The signal-to-noise ratio is already low enough.

4 Likes
5

[Insert “Kill It With Fire” GIF Here]

6
4 Likes
7

Seems a very reasonable rule to put into place given the amount of sheer-gibberish I’ve had people ask me to “fix” when the fix is don’t do that.

8

Rules have been updated:

https://crucible.hubbe.net/faq#aicontent

Please let me know if I should rephrase or explain more.

I also clarified the screenshot policy a bit.

2 Likes
9

AI is a tool, for sure. But how you use it should be smart.

“Take this list and alphabetize it for me” - or something similar where you want to have it format something with proper indentation for example.

"What is this bit of code doing - explain to me like I’m 5 please:

template<int Width, class col_t>
class AbstractDisplayController : public DisplayControllerBase<Width, col_t> {
public:
  Display<Width, col_t>* display_;
  void SetDisplay(Display<Width, col_t>* display) override {
    display_ = display;
  }
  bool ImageScreen() { return display_ && display_->GetScreen() == SCREEN_IMAGE; }
};

This is a way to learn about how things work.

You can’t say “write my prop file for me”.

10

I’ve found you have to be very careful about how you ask it a question. If you want a vaguely accurate response, you kind of have to close off every avenue it could go down to try and funnel it to the outcome you want. For that reason, it kind of helps if you know the answer before the ask the question, but that pretty much defeats the object of using it in the first place! LOL!

11

I blame Gell-Mann Amnesia.

1 Like
12

The technical term is ‘slop’.

1 Like
13

I would rephrase this:

  • “Don’t post screenshots if copy-paste will work. Screenshots are not allowed if copy-paste works.”

to

  • “Don’t post screenshots of text if it can be copy-pasted. Screenshots are not allowed if copy-paste works.”

Opptional: “For example: Arduino outputs/error messages can be copy/pasted.”