32
I totally missed the point when PeerTube got so good
(ani.social)
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
Why do people bring this up every fucking time?
Because they know it's not accurate and explicitly mention it so you know where this information comes from.
Then why post it at all?
Because they'd still like to know? it's generally expected to do some research on your own before asking other people, and inform them of what you've already tried
Asking ChatGPT isn’t research.
ChatGPT is a moderately useful tertiary source. Quoting Wikipedia isn't research, but using Wikipedia to find primary sources and reading those is a good faith effort. Likewise, asking ChatGPT in and of itself isn't research, but it can be a valid research aid if you use it to find relevant primary sources.
At least some editor will usually make sure Wikipedia is correct. There’s nobody ensuring chatGPT is correct.
Just using the "information" it regurgitates isn't very useful, which is why I didn't recommend doing that. Whether the information summarized by Wikipedia and ChatGPT is accurate really isn't important, you use those tools to find primary sources.
I’d argue that it’s very important, especially since more and more people are using it. Wikipedia is generally correct and people, myself included, edit incorrect things. ChatGPT is a black box and there’s no user feedback. It’s also stupid to waste resources to run an inefficient LLM that a regular search and a few minutes of time, along with like a bite of an apple worth of energy, could easily handle. After all that, you’re going to need to check all those sources chatGPT used anyways, so how much time is it really saving you? At least with Wikipedia I know other people have looked at the same things I’m looking at, and a small percentage of those people will actually correct errors.
Many people aren’t using it as a valid research aid like you point out, they’re just pasting directly out of it onto the internet. This is the use case I dislike the most.
AI seems to think it’s always right but in reality it is seldom correct.
Sounds like every human it's been trained on
No, it sounds like a mindless statistics machine because that’s what it is. Even stupid people have reasons for saying and doing things.
If those people are inaccurately spouting 'facts' from some article they can barely remember, yeah that's pretty much exactly the same output.
Why post anything? Because they wanted to, the same way you posted something that you felt was worth adding. For me it wasn't adding anything. Nonetheless I answer you. Because I wanted to.
Buddy, it's nap time. Catch you in a couple hours when you're feeling better.
A nap does sound good.
People also say they googled, unfortunately
Not the same thing.
google allows for the possibility that the user was able to think critically about sources that a search returned
chapGPT is drunk uncle confidently stating a thing they heard third hand from Janet in accounting and then taking him at his word
Unfortunately now Google is ChatGPT. It provides its own shitty AI answers, and its search results have been corrupted by an ocean of slop.
Google results are like:
Is peertube compatible with the fediverse?
ADVERT
Introduction: A lot of people wonder if peertube works with other peertube instances....
ADVERT
What is peertube? Peertube was set up in 1989 by john Peer...
Pop-up: do you like our publication? Give us your email address.
ADVERT
Why you might want to set up peertube: peertube is a decentralised way....
ADVERT
Please support us! From £30 a month you can help us to write more.
Wat is the fediverse? The fediverse is a technology...
ADVERT
Articles you may also like:
ADVERT
So can peertube instances talk to each other?
ADVERT
the answer is yes.
ADVERT
In conclusion, peertube is very...
Comments (169)
John Smith wrote at 12:28 on Friday
At this point, ad blocker is pretty much mandatory for me, just like how antivirus software used to be a decade ago (probably more)
PLEASE DISABLE YOUR AD BLOCKER! We use the revenue from annoying you to feed our starving CEO!
This is the golden age of misinformation and you are bitching about citations?
"I used chatgpt"
How would you phrase this differently?
"It looks like this feature was added 5 years ago."
If asking for confirmation, just ask for confirmation.
So, your solution is for the user to provide less information and then respond to people to inform them if they used chatgpt if asked?
It just seems like much less reps are used if they say they used ChatGPT.
Additionally, if they don’t say it and no one asks, in the future people might look for a source, at least this way there is a warning there might be misinformation.
I know what your going to say next, they should research the thing themselves independently of ChatGPT, but honestly, they probably don’t care/have the time to look up released notes over the past few years.
Why would anyone ask where they got the info if it is accurate?
Apparently the feature was added 5 years ago.
So, your solution is for the user to provide less information and then respond to people to inform them if they used chatgpt if asked?
It just seems like much less reps are used if they say they used ChatGPT.
Additionally, if they don’t say it and no one asks, in the future people might look for a source, at least this way there is a warning there might be misinformation.
I know what your going to say next, they should research the thing themselves independently of ChatGPT, but honestly, they probably don’t care/have the time to look up released notes over the past few years.
what do you mean? it's like being angry that people bring up I googled something
google: I checked the listing of news sites to find information about a world event directly from professionals who double check their sources
chatGPT: I asked my hairstylist their uninformed opinion on a world event based on overheard conversations
I mean a moron could find the wrong information from google and your hairstylist could get lucky and be right, but odds are one source provides the opportunity for reliable results and the other is random and has a massive shit ton of downsides.
Lots of legitimate concerns and issues with AI, but if you're going to criticize someone saying they used it you should at least understand how it works so your criticism is applicable.
It is useful. Chatgpt performs web searches, then summarizes the results in a way customized to what you asked it. It skips the step where you have to sift through a bunch of results and determine "is this what I was looking for?" and "how does this apply to my specific context?"
Of course it can and does still get things wrong. It's crazy to market it as a new electronic god. But it's not random, and it's right the majority of the time.
Right: it skips the part where human intelligence and critical thinking is applied. Do you not understand how that's a fucking problem‽
Could you try to understand what I'm saying instead of jumping down my throat?
If I want to turn off a certain type of notification in a program I'm using, I don't need to sift through three forum threads to learn how to do that. I'm fine taking the AI route and don't think I've lost my humanity.
Honest answer? It's easy and it won't judge you for asking stupid questions.
Edit - people are replying as if I said I do this. I'm sorry for the confusion. I don't. This is why I see other people do it. When it comes to the general population, most people don't care, they just want easy.
Search engines and Wikipedia don't judge you for asking stupid questions either.
No it'll just hallucinate shit that'll make you look dumb when you go and state it as fact.