Mastodawn

Here's a thought experiment.

Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.

If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?

If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?

(Please retoot this #LLM #poll for wider reach)

AI mark signals HIGHER quality

0.2%

AI mark signals NO DIFFERENCE in quality

2.6%

AI mark signals LOWER quality

97.3%

Poll ended at Feb 20 at 9:25am.

Show thread

Francesco P Lovergine

Feb 13

@sjn
The use of AI is not relevant for quality. One produces good or bad products with or without AI use.
It is definitely dependent on the human side, whether or not her/his homework is done. Let me say that I saw shitty code produced by humans and AI, as well as good enough code.

Show thread

Salve J. Nilsen Feb 13

@gisgeek I think that strictly within the software development field, you may have a point - under the right circumstances.

Sadly, these tools aren't _only_ used for supporting highly skilled software developers.

Just take a look at your profile photo - clearly generated! What do you think this tells people about yourself?

This is what I'm asking in the poll: Does the next person seeing that image associate it with a positive, negative, or no change in quality?

Makes you think, no?

Show thread

Daniël Franke

Feb 16

@sjn @gisgeek "I think that strictly within the software development field, you may have a point - under the right circumstances." hard disagree, and honestly, people thinking that putting bits of already existing code together until it looks like it working is the same as software development is insulting to say the least.

Like, I can heap a lot of actual shit together in a river until stuff can pass to the other side and call it a bridge... but that doesn't make me an engineer.

Show thread

Aron (Sten S.)

@ainmosni @sjn @gisgeek

Funny thing is, this isn't even new. I had students in the past (~2008) who blatantly copied and pasted stack overflow solutions to a compiling program that almost did the things they wanted them to do.

Unfortunately these programs also did a lot more, a lot wrong and didn't show structure or a recognizable thought process behind it.

These students couldn't even describe what their code, that they claimed they wrote themselves, was supposed to do.

Feels a lot like vibe coding nowadays, with the main difference, that each if these students realized that they had to put in the effort to learn their basics to actually receive their grades (Most of them did) and it was part of their learning journey.

IMHO this stage of realization is missing with most vibe coders nowadays, so these people never actually start a learning journey.