llm/7c7e49f1-870c-4915-9398-3b2e1f116c0c/batch-18-f7c417df-b172-4409-a4c5-c44ec7f757da-input.json
You are a comment classifier. Given a list of topics and a batch of comments, assign each comment to up to 3 of the most relevant topics.
TOPICS (use these 1-based indices):
1. Toxic moderation culture
2. LLMs replacing Stack Overflow
3. Duplicate question closures
4. Knowledge repository vs help desk debate
5. Community decline timeline
6. Discord as alternative platform
7. Future of LLM training data
8. Gamification and reputation systems
9. Expert knowledge preservation
10. Reddit as alternative
11. Question quality standards
12. Moderator power dynamics
13. Google search integration decline
14. Stack Exchange expansion problems
15. Human interaction loss
16. Documentation vs community answers
17. Site mission misalignment
18. New user experience
19. GitHub Discussions alternative
20. Corporate ownership changes
COMMENTS TO CLASSIFY:
[
{
"id": "46483560",
"text": "My personal bet is that traditional search engines face a -70% usage drop at the moment."
}
,
{
"id": "46483126",
"text": "I doubt it. If I want to ask AI a simple question I type it into Google now."
}
,
{
"id": "46483354",
"text": "anecdotally, i personally stopped using google a lot in the last few years"
}
,
{
"id": "46483832",
"text": "LLMs are dogshit in many ways but when it comes to programming they are faster than people, respond instantaneously to further information, and can iterate until they understand the problem fully.\n\nBonus is that you don’t get some dipshit being snarky."
}
,
{
"id": "46482615",
"text": "Now that StackOverflow has been killed (in part) by LLMs, how will we train future models? Will public GitHub repos be enough?\n\nPrecise troubleshooting data is getting rare, GitHub issues are the last place where it lives nowadays."
}
,
{
"id": "46482659",
"text": "They would just use documentation. I know there is some synthesis they would lose in the training process but I’m often sending Claude through the context7 MCP to learn documentation for packages that didn’t exist, and it nearly always solves the problem for me."
}
,
{
"id": "46482739",
"text": "The brilliance of StackOverflow was in being the place to find out how to do tricky workarounds for functionality that either wasn't documented or was buggy such that workarounds were needed to make it actually work.\n\nSoftware quality is now generally a bit better than it was in 2010, but that need is ultimately still there."
}
,
{
"id": "46483046",
"text": "Assuming these end up in open source code llms will learn about them that way."
}
,
{
"id": "46483227",
"text": "Aren't a lot of projects using LLMs to generate documentation these days?"
}
,
{
"id": "46484736",
"text": "They pay lots of humans to train the LLMs.."
}
,
{
"id": "46485614",
"text": "It is always good to see other cultured people who structure their SQL queries the right way."
}
,
{
"id": "46482873",
"text": "Eternal September is finally over =)\n\nIt was impossible to ask certain programming questions. Asking there was truly last resort."
}
,
{
"id": "46486254",
"text": "Derivative of S curve"
}
,
{
"id": "46482930",
"text": "Was already dying a decade ago, but AI pretty much guarantees we'll never see a public forum that useful ever again.\n\nAI may be fine for people asking the basic stuff or who don't care about maintenance, but for a time SO was the place to find extraordinary and creative solutions that only a human can come up with.\n\nWhen you were in a jam and found a gem on there it not only solved your problem, but brought clarity and deep knowledge to your entire situation in ways that I've never seen an LLM do. It inspired you to refactor the code that got you into that mess to begin with and you grew as a developer.\n\nThis timeline shows the death of a lot more than just the site itself."
}
,
{
"id": "46500815",
"text": "Code golfing on SO was fun, too!\n\nI just looked it up, and \"Note: This tag is currently blacklisted and can no longer be used.\" lmfao, what a braindead site, so glad I left years ago, after many years of greatly reduced activity. Source (at the top):\nhttps://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/code-golf?tab=New...\n\nLook at fun stuff like this from 2010: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2440314/code-golf-%cf%80..."
}
,
{
"id": "46501766",
"text": "You do realize that they made an entire site for CodeGolf that is reasonably active (and has its own culture... and lead to the creation of specialized languages for it... and even pushed the bounds of OEIS a few times - https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5318 )?\n\nhttps://codegolf.stackexchange.com\n\nThe issue is that code golf didn't fit well into the intended design of the library and it split off 15 years ago https://stackexchange.com/sites?view=list#oldest"
}
,
{
"id": "46502706",
"text": "I am fully aware that it's split off. My entire point of mentioning it was that even a bit of extra fun got excised from the site.\n\n>The issue is that code golf didn't fit well into the intended design\n\nExactly! The intended design of SO was to be a hellhole, even though it was able to stave off this fate in its infancy by virtue of having too many optimistic new users."
}
,
{
"id": "46487761",
"text": "It makes sense to see the number of questions decline over time as people google questions and get results. It would be interesting to look at the number of comments and views of questions over time to see if that has declined as LLMs have driven declining engagement and discussion."
}
,
{
"id": "46483336",
"text": "I ended up having a high reputation on SO. Not sure why, but it’s over 7000.\n\nI also experienced many of the issues I see described here. The most egregious was when I asked a completely valid question for R: How to fit a curve through a set of points, with each point having an error associated.\n\nThis is something completely normal in a physics experiment. Each measurement had its own error interval. But, for people using R, this seemed like something completely new. So, they just downvoted the question and told me I was wrong.\n\nI ended up answering my own question… but was also told that was wrong and that all points must have the same error interval.\n\nInstead of answering a programming question, people just went around denying experimental physics.\n\nI think that was the beginning of the end of SO for me."
}
,
{
"id": "46486054",
"text": "This entire thread is fantastic. I felt nostalgic, angry and then concerned all at once.\n\nI love LLMs. But I miss SO. I miss being able to have that community. How do we bring it back?\n\nIf anyone from the Stack Overflow team is reading this (I assume you are): what’s the plan?\n\nMy take: stop optimizing for raw question volume and start optimizing for producing and maintaining “known good” public knowledge. The thing SO still has that Discord and LLMs don’t is durable, linkable, reviewable answers with accountable humans behind them. But the workflow needs to match how devs work now.\n\nA concrete idea: make “asking” a guided flow that’s more like opening a good GitHub issue. Let me paste my error output, environment, minimal repro, what I tried, and what I think is happening. Then use tooling (including an LLM if you want) to pre check duplicates, suggest missing details, and auto format. Crucially: don’t punish me for being imperfect. Route borderline questions into a sandbox or draft mode where they can be improved instead of just slammed shut.\n\nSecond idea: invest hard in keeping answers current. A ton of SO is correct but stale. Add obvious “this is old” signaling and make it rewarding to post updates, not just brand new answers.\n\nLast thing that I don’t see an easy answer to: LLMs are feasting on old SO content today. But LLMs still need fresh, high quality, real world edge cases tomorrow. They need the complexity and problem solving that humans provide. A lot of the answers I get are recycled. No net new thinking. If fewer people ask publicly, where does that new ground truth come from? What’s the mechanism that keeps the commons replenished?\n\nSo… TLDR…my question to this group of incredibly intelligent people: how does SO save itself?"
}
,
{
"id": "46482706",
"text": "I mean, I kinda of miss it. But man it was a hostile place for newcomers.\n\nOnly ever asked one question and I tried to answer more than a handful but never really clicked with the site.\n\nI do wonder if it would have faired better under the original ownership before it was sold in 2021-06-02."
}
,
{
"id": "46486267",
"text": "Why did SO traffic halve from it's maximum till the ChatGPT release date? Also, for a long time after initial release, ChatGPT was pretty much useless for coding questions. It only became more or less useful ~2 years ago. So there's about 4x decline from peak to explain with reasons that do not involve LLMs. What these could be?"
}
,
{
"id": "46485009",
"text": "I’m glad it’s dead. They were super rude."
}
,
{
"id": "46485409",
"text": "Good riddance.\n\nI stopped using SO before LLM's were a thing because the community was such a pain in the ass to deal with."
}
,
{
"id": "46486026",
"text": "llm killed stackoverflow"
}
,
{
"id": "46483263",
"text": "Seems like there are \"blocked by cloudflare\" number of questions per month.\n\nTheir blocking of everyone not using chrome/etc from accessing their website probably contributed quite a bit to the implied downturn I'm reading in other comments."
}
,
{
"id": "46484145",
"text": "Even if you get on the site you'll end up dealing with Cloudflare's BBBaaS (breaking back buttons as a service)."
}
,
{
"id": "46482953",
"text": "I really admire that they publicly posted this data, and hope that the platform can find a new type of pivot or draw to bring back a community."
}
,
{
"id": "46485619",
"text": "This is incredible.\nAnyone who claims LLMs aren't useful will need to explain how come almost every programmer can solve 95% of his problems with an LLM without needing anything else. This is real usefulness right here.\n\nEDIT: I'm not saying I'm loving what happened and what is becoming of our roles and careers, I'm just saying things have changed forever; there's still a (shrinking) minority of people who seem to not be convinced."
}
,
{
"id": "46485975",
"text": "Maybe we had too many programmers who weren’t capable of actually solving their own problems. Maybe only one in twenty programmers were ever actually any good at their jobs."
}
,
{
"id": "46490867",
"text": "Another note to add here: The whole system was stupid, too! What do you mean, I can only give answers, but not comment?\n\nWhile there is much more to say about SO's demise, the \"interaction\" on the platform was definitely not one of its strengths, either."
}
,
{
"id": "46491108",
"text": "Comments have less visibility in moderation. This has made them spam / link farming targets in the past.\n\nA lot of people come to Stack Overflow with the mindset that it is a forum to discuss something and have tangential discussions in the comments.\n\nhttps://stackoverflow.com/tour\n\n> This site is all about getting answers. It's not a discussion forum. There's no chit-chat.\n\nThe \"no comments until you get a little bit of rep\" is to try to help people realize that difference from the start."
}
,
{
"id": "46484934",
"text": "Flag it as off topic"
}
,
{
"id": "46487886",
"text": ">This post was not virtue signaling enough and therefore closed as duplicate.\n\nSO had the greatest minds but the shitiest moderation"
}
,
{
"id": "46484454",
"text": "What an incredible graph"
}
,
{
"id": "46485817",
"text": "For those who have historically wondered about or objected to \"moderation\" (people usually mean curation here; as the overwhelming majority of the actions they're talking about are not performed by moderators ) on Stack Overflow, here's a hand-picked list of important discussions from the meta site explaining some policy basics:\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/251758 Why is Stack Overflow so negative of late?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/254262 If your question was not well received, read this before you post your next question\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/254358 Why the backlash against poor questions?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/254770 What is Stack Overflow’s goal?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/260263 How long should we wait for a poster to clarify a question before closing?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/261592 How much research effort is expected of Stack Overflow users?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/262446 Are we being \"elitist\"? Is there something wrong with that?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/262791 The rudeness on Stack Overflow is too damn high (N.B.: linked specifically for the satire in the top-voted answer)\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/284236 Why is \"Can someone help me?\" not a useful question?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/309208 Are there questions that are too trivial to answer?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/357436 Why isn't it required to provide comments/feedback for downvotes, and why are proposals suggesting this so negatively received?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366757 On the false dichotomy between quality and kindness\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366889 Can we make it more obvious to new users that downvotes on the main site are not insults and in fact can help them help themselves?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/368072 Comments asking for clarification or an MCVE are not rude/abusive\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/370792 Is this really what we should consider \"unwelcoming\"?\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/417476 Question Close Reasons - Definitions and Guidance\n\nhttps://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/429808 Why should I help close \"bad\" questions that I think are valid, instead of helping the OP with an answer? (fd: my self-answered Q&A)\n\nNote that IDs are in chronological order. The rate of new meta.stackoverflow.com posts fell off dramatically at some point because of the formation of a network-wide meta.stackexchange.com. The earliest entries listed here are from 2014."
}
,
{
"id": "46490764",
"text": "Some of the comments in these links are hilariously elitist. They are actively embracing a hostile environment, especially towards newcomers, but how do they expect to grow and maintain a community when they are scaring users away?"
}
,
{
"id": "46486645",
"text": "Now the real question is...\n\nWhich AI company will acquire whats left of StackOverflow and all the years of question/answer data?"
}
,
{
"id": "46487707",
"text": "It is already acquired.\n\nhttps://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/399619/our-partners..."
}
,
{
"id": "46486614",
"text": "Holy shit."
}
,
{
"id": "46486417",
"text": "I not even hearing stack overflow survey for 2025\n\ndamn bro, its sad how \"tradition\" is gone now\n\nedit: I know they still doing it but usually there is \"viral\" post,yt video etc for developer talking about it in my feed\n\nnow??? less people talk about it anymore"
}
,
{
"id": "46484040",
"text": "Cool, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46344599\n\nWonder why my submission wasn't featured and this one went to #1 immediately ... oh wait I actually know :^)!"
}
,
{
"id": "46485547",
"text": "Why?"
}
,
{
"id": "46491060",
"text": "Stackoverflow bureaucracy and rule mongering are insane. I recommend participation just to behold the natives in their biom. Its like a small european union laser focused on making asking snd answering a question the largest pain point of a site that is mainly about asking and answering questions."
}
,
{
"id": "46488497",
"text": "Since the trend must go on, we expect StackExchange to now offer answers, and the user responses need to be questions. We could even make a quiz game show out of that! /s"
}
,
{
"id": "46482596",
"text": "it died"
}
,
{
"id": "46483235",
"text": "The most toxic, degrading, and insulting forum for people. My questions, as well as my answers, always got poisonous criticism. Good."
}
]
Return ONLY a JSON array with this exact structure (no other text):
[
{
"id": "comment_id_1",
"topics": [
1,
3,
5
]
}
,
{
"id": "comment_id_2",
"topics": [
2
]
}
,
...
]
Rules:
- Each comment can have 0 to 3 topics
- Use 1-based topic indices
- Only assign topics that are genuinely relevant to the comment
- If no topics match, use an empty array:
{
"id": "...",
"topics": []
}
47