this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
374 points (98.7% liked)
Technology
85245 readers
5219 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
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.
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.