Counterpart to Wikipedia Based on AI
-
A problem I have encountered when trying to make improvements to Wikipedia pages is what I would call "bullies". By this I mean regulars who are familiar enough with the way Wikipedia works to overpower the corrections of people who spend less time doing edits there, sometimes even waging war on them and driving them away.
As a result (and for other reasons), the accuracy of Wikipedia is considerably less than 100%.
ChatGPT seems fairly impressive, and one wonders if it will soon be the case that an alternative to Wikipedia could be made that has pages produced by AI.
Thoughts?
-
@jinpa A generative AI is no better than its inputs. (And often markedly worse!) If it's getting its information from trusted sources like Wikipedia, how do you expect it to exceed Wikipedia's quality?
-
@Mason_Wheeler Wikipedia is not a primary source. It could get its inputs from primary sources.
-
@jinpa langchain seems to be able to work like bing, an llm agent that augments it's answers with searches
-
@jinpa I propose the name Hallucipedia.
-
To once again quote
read another book:There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-
@topspin My sheaves are not flabby! Yours are!
-
@Applied-Mediocrity don't be such a Grothendieck.
