It’s, I’m aware of that. But you don’t seem to be aware of the fact that most cultural output (and yes, that includes Reddit shitposts) is produced by a small minority of people. Most people never contribute anything. So however shit the AI slop may be (which I’m not in any way denying), it’s still better than what the majority of people can manage. Just look at the percentage of people that are functionally illiterate.
AI doesn’t produce data suitable for training AI. It’s a huge problem when AI generated slop makes its way into the training set because it generally degrades the quality of the model. Like a photocopy of a photocopy.
So where is all the data its trained on to surpass most people come from? Do you think they’re curating what they feed it based on IQ scores or something? Verifying accuracy, competency, etc? Or are you aware they just turn on the reddit/stackoverflow/github/etc. scrapers and start pumping them full of unfiltered 100% pure grade A internet bullshit?
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
underisk@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Im sorry dude but if your argument is reddit and stackoverflow are the basis for being “better than what the majority of people can manage” then I just have to respectfully disagree.
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
To be fair, I do think the average accepted stackoverflow answer displays far more competence than the average human.
One of the few things I use LLM’s for is giving me overviews of best-practice in things I’m not familiar with (before reading the posts I find to get more in-depth understanding)
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Then you obviously live in a bubble.
ulterno@programming.dev 1 day ago
I would assume they rank the stuff by vote-count.