ChatGPT Is Stack Overflow for the Lazy and Helpless

That's right! I'm back with another spicy hot take related to generative AI tools like ChatGPT, and this time, in a rare turn of events, I'm defending Stack Overflow. Let's see how this one turns out. The Renegade Coder Lore I started writing back in 2016 because I was fed up with the culture of software education spaces online, specifically Stack Overflow. Everyone knows what I'm talking about. The culture of the site is regularly described as toxic, such as in these pieces: Stack Overflow Isn't Very Welcoming. It's Time for That to Change (2018) Longtime Stack Overflow Mods Quitting Because of Toxic Culture (2019) StackOverflow has Become Too Toxic. My Personal Experience (2022) In response, I wanted there to be a way to provide education to aspiring (and even current) software developers that was welcoming and respectful. As a result, I created this site (and really a site before it) to do just that. Obviously, the site has changed a lot since back then, and now I do a lot more social commentary than software education. That said, I still have that same mission in mind any time I write something for this site. Also, I'm thankfully not the only one with that same mission, as places like dev.to exist now. Why Bring Up Stack Overflow? Stack Overflow is an interesting site amidst the culture of software development. It's perhaps one of the greatest gatekeepers in our field, and I have to imagine that Stack Overflow was the straw the broke the camel's back for quite a few developers over the years. With that said, Stack Overflow does at least one thing right: it gatekeeps lazy people. As a current educator now, I am charitable to just about any student except the lazy ones who demonstrate learned helplessness. After all, I say this at the start of every semester: you will succeed in this course if you just put in the work. Laziness is perhaps one of the most frustrating qualities to deal with as an educator. In my classes, it tends to manifest in students abusing my charitability to have me do their work for them. It's not always obvious early on because I like to meet students where they are, but it becomes increasingly obvious as the semester continues. To illustrate what I mean, just imagine what it feels like to work with a student who asks an interesting question and lets you walk them through the idea to the point of the "aha!" moment. Similarly, imagine a student who takes issue with one of your claims and teaches you something you hadn't thought about. Now, imagine the student who asks you how to fix a bug in their code, walks away, and comes back when a new bug arises two minutes later. In that span of time, there is absolutely no way the student even attempted to solve the issue. There is no conversation you can have with them that will even be interesting because they don't have the slightest clue what their code is supposed to do or why it might be wrong. They just want you to write it for them. The student in the latter scenario is rare, BUT they will consume a lot of your time if you let them. It is your duty as an educator to not enable that behavior, and I believe Stack Overflow does an excellent job of excluding those kinds of users. No More Gatekeepers Gatekeeping is something I really fought against in my career. It's something I felt that ultimately even moved me out of the tech space and into the education space. However, I am starting to come to terms with the idea that maybe some gatekeeping is okay (and dare I say, necessary). Typically, I would say that a barrier to entry into tech is bad. I don't think writing software is particularly difficult, and I believe just about anyone who can handle middle school math can do it. In fact, the idea that tech should be hidden behind the barrier of a bachelor's degree has been eroding for some time now. That said, I can't help but be in agreement with the Stack Overflow community that the ability to educate yourself or self-learn should be a core value for everyone, not just people in tech. I have a hard time tolerating people who do not wish to learn. So, imagine my amazement when one of the last necessary evils, Stack Overflow, is being usurped by the advent of generative AI and tools like ChatGPT, Cursor, and Claude. There is now absolutely no barrier to entry for our field, and we're paying for it dearly. ChatGPT Over Stack Overflow What particularly bothers me, though, is that these generative AI tools are no replacement for real education. I used to get really frustrated with Stack Overflow because while they almost always have a good answer to a question, they don't always provide an explanation. In other words, you could get the code you needed for your particular problem, but the author would often not explain how or why it worked. Back then, I used to worry that folks mindlessly copying code snippets from Stack Overflow would lead to issues in production systems. I am certain that has happened over the years. It's why I am so careful to list multiple solutions and describe contexts where each one would be appropriate. Now, if you use a tool like Cursor, you don't even necessarily have to look at the code it's generating, and you certainly don't need to know how it works. Broadly, we treat this like its some great innovation, but it deeply disturbs me. We treat digital infrastructure like it's some toy. Imagine being able to do something similar with physical infrastructure, like creative mode in Minecraft. "Look guys, I just spawned in a bridge over this river without even the slightest understanding of how bridges work." Have we considered if the land is even capable of supporting the bridge? What about the boats that might need to travel under the bridge? Are we sure the bridge can handle our weight? Oh, we're just trusting the tool blindly. Got it! The Obsession With Industry Ready Students It's really this lack of understanding the tech (and the ethics of its usage) that bothers me. It's something that I've increasingly seen as computer science programs change their curriculum to address supposed industry needs. When I first learned to code, I used a tool called DrJava, and I've written about how much I love it as an educational tool. DrJava is a really nice editor for learning as you have nothing holding your hand: no autocomplete, no autoformatting, and no red squiggly error messages. On the flip side, you can play with small snippets of code in the interactions pane to learn how they work before trying to use them. All-in-all, I recommend the tool to anyone who wants to really learn how to code. With that said, most of the courses I've seen use more industry standard tools. After all, there is often this pressure from both industry and students to use them. Of course, why not? The sooner students can get used to industry standard tools, the sooner they can slot in as cogs in the workplace. The problem is that while industry standard tools are great when you know what you're doing, they're not so great for the learning process. Just to give you an example of what I mean, editors like Eclipse and VS Code show the red squiggly lines when you write a line with a syntax error. Because beginners don't know what they're doing, they tend to get in the habit of just mindlessly modifying the line until the error goes away. Now, I think it's important to acknowledge that maybe we don't throw students in the deep end from the start. I don't think we need to teach them assembly or use the command line to ensure they understand the fundamentals. In fact, I'm a proponent of teaching Python over lower level languages because I want to keep my students engaged. Likewise, while my peers use Eclipse and Subversion in their classes, I use more contemporary tools like Git and VS Code. At the same time, I think it's important to acknowledge that each level of abstraction takes away from that deeper understanding. One example where abstraction certainly goes too far in the learning process is zyBooks. While I don't personally use zyBooks, our university does in the intro coding courses. I find it one of the more infuriating educational choices because students come to me lacking extremely basic coding skills. If you're not familiar with zyBooks, it's essentially a digital textbook where you solve coding problems in textboxes. If you want a pretty direct analog, see LeetCode. The problem with both zyBooks and LeetCode is that the students never have to write their own tests. In fact, they never even have to conceive of their own test cases. So, when they come to me, they literally don't know how to test their code. I will get questions like "how do I know if this works?" I don't know brother. Have you tried running it? Another area where abstraction goes too far is in personal devices. Students that grew up with tablets now come through our computer science programs without understanding basic computer literacy. In other words, they don't understand file systems, which means they don't understand folders or pathing. I can't even begin to tell you how many times I have to explain to students that their program can't find their file because the path they used was wrong. Of course, this example is somewhat out of our hands as educators, but it goes to show how abstraction often competes with understanding. Side note: the article I just linked is written by unixdigest, and it's phenomenal. As I was editing this piece, I did a quick search for "abstraction makes you dumb" to see if anyone had similar thoughts. From there, I found a Reddit post, which linked to unixdigest directly. In general, I'm amazed at how I somehow managed to align so closely with some of their takes, including the "files and folders" issue I mentioned above and the Wall-E reference below. I would love to meet whoever wrote it!Also, I have to somewhat laugh at myself because I wrote a piece a few years back about the things you don't need to know to be a software developer. In that piece, I mention math, syntax & semantics, and computers. I don't think the article really contradicts anything I've said here, but I might amend that piece by saying that there is some base-level knowledge you should have about those topics. You just don't need to be on expert in them. Given what I've seen with the advancement of IDEs, personal devices, and generative AI, I really worry about how prepared our students will be to do the work well. I'm certain any idiot with the ability to prompt AI will be able to produce code, but I am not very hopeful for the future of technology. The Future Is Wall-E Right now, I think it's interesting to discuss what a future dystopia might look like. Everyone has their own favorite piece of media to point to, like Brave New World or 1984, but I'm in the Wall-E camp, personally. After all, when I think about the future, I think about how generative AI is just good enough to give the learned helplessness crowd the illusion of learning and creating something. Perhaps this is so frustrating to me because one of my close friends is a bit helpless at times. The social pressure of being made fun of is the only thing stopping him from being completely helpless. For instance, I remember playing a soccer game with him and the moment one of the guys stopped playing, he took it as his opportunity to also stop playing. He knew the first person to quit would be the one to take the heat, so he swiftly exited when the window of opportunity opened. He does stuff like this all the time. Like he’s famous for cheating in scrabble, flexing his admin privileges in Minecraft, and hacking in money and stats in Risk of Rain 2 because he likes the illusion of earning something more than actually working to earn it. If more people become accustomed to this illusion, then a future where we're all happy to be fed slop is right around the corner. At least in that future, the robots find love. With that said, thanks again for taking some time to listen to my rant. If you're wondering how I always seem to have something to say about the state of tech, it's because I keep a series of notes as I have an idea. This article was jumpstarted by a note I found from April 4th, so thanks past me! If you're an AI hater like me, then you're going to love the following articles: No, Generative AI Is Not Just Another Innovation Generative AI Makes It Feel Bad to Be an Educator Is Anyone Else Bothered by How Quickly We Adopted Generative AI? Likewise, feel free to show your support by heading over to my list of ways to grow the site. Otherwise, thanks for reading. See you next time.