https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7bdba/ ... edia-apartVolunteers who maintain the digital encyclopedia are divided on how to deal with the rise of AI-generated content and misinformation.
AI Is Tearing Wikipedia Apart
-
- Janitor
- Posts: 464
- Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:56 pm
- Has thanked: 120 times
- Been thanked: 87 times
AI Is Tearing Wikipedia Apart
The irony being how much WP has been used to train LLMs
-
- Sucks Mod
- Posts: 626
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
- Has thanked: 786 times
- Been thanked: 382 times
Re: AI Is Tearing Wikipedia Apart
The funniest part is that by vetting the AI content they are training it again. For tech billionaires. For free.suckadmin wrote: ↑Sun May 26, 2024 2:33 amThe irony being how much WP has been used to train LLMs
https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7bdba/ ... edia-apartVolunteers who maintain the digital encyclopedia are divided on how to deal with the rise of AI-generated content and misinformation.
-
- Janitor
- Posts: 464
- Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:56 pm
- Has thanked: 120 times
- Been thanked: 87 times
Re: AI Is Tearing Wikipedia Apart
making the dead internet theory a realityboredbird wrote: ↑Sun May 26, 2024 4:14 amThe funniest part is that by vetting the AI content they are training it again. For tech billionaires. For free.suckadmin wrote: ↑Sun May 26, 2024 2:33 amThe irony being how much WP has been used to train LLMs
https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7bdba/ ... edia-apartVolunteers who maintain the digital encyclopedia are divided on how to deal with the rise of AI-generated content and misinformation.
Another example that bugs me is that I used to rely on Google image search which was an earlier example of ML but now the discover button mostly returns pinterest hits which usually have no info about the image. Fortunately there's still tineye.com.
-
- Sucks Critic
- Posts: 315
- Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2023 5:57 pm
- Has thanked: 72 times
- Been thanked: 153 times
Re: AI Is Tearing Wikipedia Apart
For a few years Wikipedians on talk pages have been showing resignation that a sufficiently funded Google-Gemini-powered encyclopedia would, by merely existing, outperform them. Specifically outperform them in their nominal goal of "taking Google material and arranging it into encyclopedia articles without original research".
There's a chance Google might even fund such a thing and make their own Wikipedia. They are already replacing Wikipedia's featured snippets on Google search with their own AI results that is, in theory, much less biased than Wikipedia editors.
Also, doesn't Wikipedia already rely on AI to keep out vandals and bad sources? I thought that was their primary technology for that. Next up, writing articles. Then they could use that first technology, with a function to web search sources, to clean up the second generative AI one.
There's a chance Google might even fund such a thing and make their own Wikipedia. They are already replacing Wikipedia's featured snippets on Google search with their own AI results that is, in theory, much less biased than Wikipedia editors.
Also, doesn't Wikipedia already rely on AI to keep out vandals and bad sources? I thought that was their primary technology for that. Next up, writing articles. Then they could use that first technology, with a function to web search sources, to clean up the second generative AI one.