The AI "understood" the concepts enough. It can generate readable code in new syntax like Typst, D2lang etc; refer 80 page documentation scattered across urls (looking at you AWS); clone tools from Github to find undocumented features.

Stackexchange network has died for me way before LLMs were even a dream.

Passive aggressive commenting and deleting questions because it looked remotely similar to another one was enough for me.

I was there for learning and sharing, not for the proverbial fighting cage.

I can spend 5 minutes more and use a search engine, and then take my own notes and keep them to myself. Thanks.

People do still talk about programming online, just not on Stackoverflow.

I think since AI finally provided a non-adversarial alternative to Stackoverflow it lost the critical mass to be a one stop shop for all tools/languages/projects. So people just reverted to communication forums specific to those tools/languages/projects.

There are plenty of project mailing lists, GitHub issues, language forums, blog posts etc. that are still active. E.g. just the Rust users forum gets more than 2-3 posts per day.

I mean, most frontier labs train on user input by default, seems like a pretty good source of information.

Ouch ... brutal, disheartening, but true.

You guys tbh are just infuriating. StackOverflow and ServerFault in particular are CC BY-SA. I contributed to a lot of websites which are currently switching from public access to login required. I did it under the assumption that anyone will be able to read it. Thank god Stack Exchange and HN so far are not showing petty resentment.

but it had the letters s, e and x in a row, so that wont pass the work web filtering software.

Designed by a true admin

> We're collectively discovering that it was about the process too, not just results.

Being able to judge the reliability of the source was huge. AI is a great discovery engine, but a terrible source for reliable information.

And, note, that perhaps - even more of those social interactions will also be absorbed, along with the participants, into the Chat model's sphere. It wants, and will get, all: Result(s), process, and participants. It is grey goo for all intellectual - and soon, emotional - work and products and inputs and byproducts.-

Being useful and being good for us is not the same thing. I don't think I've heard many people say LLMs don't do what they are supposed to do.

> We're collectively discovering that it was about the process too, not just results.

We. I remember five years ago in the old manual days. When the 10Xers would culturally gatekeep programming based on whether people intrinsically liked coding itself. I.e. the process.

Then there was a curious shift. Several elites had a realization: oh it was never about the process for me. I just like getting the results. (In however an alienating way.) "I'm pragmatic"

> I'm not questioning if AI delivers, it does, and you need - cannot say it more politely - a reality check if you think it's completely useless.

Why fret. The doubters will be washed away by the flood anyway. I’m completely serious. Either if or when, it’s not like anyone can stay a doubter on a computer if (if or when) everything is transformed.

I can never understand these faith rituals. First declare that you are a believer. Then declare that the doubters are delusional. Politely.

But delusion is a reality-correcting problem, except for the clinically ill.

More sad than weird. All of human artistic creation seems up for grabs.

If the AI’s are the one exchanging the ideas then it should be AIsexchange.

What happens when intelligent entities are working is that the entity posting the question itself starts with a working answer, although not an optimal answer. Over time, other entities provide more optimal answers.

[flagged]