16

A recent question included a disclosure along the lines of "I asked ChatGPT, and it said it didn't know".

I wonder if it would be worth addressing, under https://stackoverflow.com/help/how-to-ask, the use of AI in terms of the amount of research required, something along the lines of "Consulting AI is neither sufficient nor necessary to meet the standard of prior research expected."

17
  • 56
    I think the AI here is noise. Prior to it, we've had variations of "I've tried everything and it didn't work" or "I've searched the whole internet and didn't find an answer". Statements like that are not useful. Moreover, often somebody "searched the whole internet", yet googling their title might find the answer. Or otherwise the question is trivial to look up. So, it's just the tired old "I'll add words and hope people answer me" attitude. AI doesn't really change it. Commented Mar 22, 2025 at 15:34
  • 7
    Yes; Mentioning AI was helpful is just noise, and probably worth just removing as a community editor since what the author tried didn’t work. Of course this requires a MRE that isn’t obviously created by a LLM. Commented Mar 22, 2025 at 15:52
  • 29
    It's noise just like any other noise. Remove it. Commented Mar 22, 2025 at 16:02
  • 23
    It's better not to make the help page too specific. There are so many different ways in which the user could add noise to their question. It doesn't matter what it is, if it's noise it doesn't belong there. Commented Mar 22, 2025 at 16:03
  • 2
    @Dharman okay, but the existing page doesn't really explain at all what we think of as "noise" or why we don't want it. Commented Mar 22, 2025 at 23:27
  • 9
    The problem is the text in the Ask Wizard, not the help center. The link describes a somewhat different category of unhelpful information, but the cause is the same; it is unlikely that users adding this sort of thing have read the help center in detail. Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 3:15
  • 3
    I send nearly all Users of Posts I review in the 'Staging Ground' to the [ask] Help-page where indeed unfortunately "noise" is not mentioned (and even less defined), resulting in very regularly having to explain that "noise"/"fluff" = [talking about Google/'ChatGPT' "research" + mentioning their "newbie"-level + "Thanks"/"any help appreciated"] is not needed and should be removed... (or removing it myself). // => There should be a "noise"/"not needed" section in the [ask] Help-page. Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 8:26
  • 2
    "I've tried everything: the embassy, the German government, the consulate. I even talked to the U.N. ambassador. It's no use..." Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 12:04
  • 1
    Reference: Have you searched "high and low"? - answer to What should I keep out of my posts and titles? on Meta SE. I'm proud to have thoroughly revised it myself to clarify what research details we want. Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 15:25
  • @RyanM I'd consider that an answer, if you want to post it, otherwise I might post it myself. Main point being "it is unlikely that users adding this sort of thing have read the help center in detail". Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 15:50
  • 3
    I agree that it's too much to expect most users to read the help center first, but I think that should be the place to refer people when explaining why their question was edited or needs improvement. The "ChatGPT didn't help/didn't know" excuse just seems to be the new version of "I tried everything": clearly, if ChatGPT can't help, what else is left to do? Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 16:05
  • 2
    enough people even say "I tried everything" when they have tried nothing at all. it's just a lie to sidestep having to expend effort. even when they did expend some effort, they don't allow us to see what they did (the quality of the effort) by summarizing as "didn't help". as @PM2Ring said, the wrong effort is useless. not volunteering the details is being difficult, and refusing to give details is actually resisting help. some of that, formulated positively, should be spelled out somewhere. I too am sometimes surprised when I review the usual help articles and see that lacking Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 16:34
  • @chepner - I don’t know; maybe actually troubleshoot it instead of using ChatGPT which is trained on static data and is unable to answer any questions that it wasn’t trained on? Using ChatGPT is worse than not even troubleshooting it. Commented Mar 23, 2025 at 21:07
  • Disagree, "research" = "googling" = "asking AI" already. I am doing first the latter more and more often and almost never fallback to a need of reading a book myself. If OP asked ChatGPT he is already did more work than many posters. Wouldn't call it lack of research. Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 11:24
  • 2
    @Sinatr, ...low-quality research ("asked ChatGPT", "searched Google") certainly doesn't motivate me to help someone. By contrast, if they list the specific steps ChatGPT told them to take that didn't work, that would be concretely useful; we should tune our prompting towards that end. Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 21:17

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
27

The problem is the text in the Ask Wizard, not the help center. The Ask Wizard provides a text area labeled:

What did you try and what were you expecting?
Describe what you tried, what you expected to happen, and what actually resulted. Minimum 20 characters.

While the linked post describes a somewhat different category of unhelpful information, the cause is the same. Tweaking the help center would be unlikely to have much effect, as it is unlikely that users adding this sort of thing have read the help center in detail.

8
  • 2
    I am confused... If the problem is that text, then why won't tweaking it help? If it's unlikely to have much effect, since those users have not read it, then how is it the problem? Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 1:38
  • 6
    Honestly hate that prompt. Too many write "I expect to get an answer" Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 5:42
  • 2
    @Phil although, there is one good thing about it - it's hilarious when spammers fill it in with something like "I expect people to know about <company or product>" Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 7:50
  • 1
    Maybe instead of "what you expected to happen" a more specific "what was the expected result of your code" to prevent people assuming it's about "what happens after I posted this question" Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 10:59
  • 1
    +1, new user is unlikely to read help-center beforehead (prove me wrong?), but if question gets closed, downvoted or deleted, then OP is likely to click links in banner to figure out the reasons (I would do). So extending help-center in general make sense, but I am unsure what close reason will lead to "how to ask good question" (perhaps from another help-center article?) and when would sentence related to AI research would make question closed. Without knowing such scenario I wouldn't edit help-center. Nor I see a bit problem in editing this out or requesting results in comments. Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 13:28
  • @M-- When you say "that text", do you mean the help center, or the text in the Ask Wizard? My answer refers to two different things; your comment reads as though it's conflating the two. Tweaking the Ask Wizard text would be likely to make a difference; I've suggested tweaks to it myself to address other issues. Tweaking the help center text is unlikely to make much difference, but is also not the problem. Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 21:14
  • 2
    We could clarify this, f/e with an addendum like the following: "Instead of telling us what resources you consulted, tell us which steps you took based on those resources, what the specific outcomes were, and exactly how those outcomes differed from what you intend." Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 21:19
  • @RyanM I see, I did actually confuse the two. Thanks for clarification. Commented Mar 24, 2025 at 22:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.