32
submitted 2 weeks ago by hisao@ani.social to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

When I tried it in the past, I kinda didn't take it seriously because everything was confined to its instance, but now, there's full-featured global search and proper federation everywhere? Wow, I thought I heard there were some technical obstacles making it very unlikely, but now it's just there and works great! I asked ChatGPT and it says this feature was added 5 years ago! Really? I'm not sure how I didn't notice this sooner. Was it really there for so long? With flairs showing original instance where video comes from and everything?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago

I asked ChatGPT

Why do people bring this up every fucking time?

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

Because they know it's not accurate and explicitly mention it so you know where this information comes from.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago
[-] Xkdrxodrixkr@feddit.org 3 points 2 weeks ago

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

[-] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Asking ChatGPT isn’t research.

[-] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

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.

[-] deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

At least some editor will usually make sure Wikipedia is correct. There’s nobody ensuring chatGPT is correct.

[-] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

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.

[-] deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

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.

[-] Bebopalouie@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

AI seems to think it’s always right but in reality it is seldom correct.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Sounds like every human it's been trained on

[-] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago

No, it sounds like a mindless statistics machine because that’s what it is. Even stupid people have reasons for saying and doing things.

[-] Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 1 week ago

If those people are inaccurately spouting 'facts' from some article they can barely remember, yeah that's pretty much exactly the same output.

[-] Taiatari@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

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.

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

Buddy, it's nap time. Catch you in a couple hours when you're feeling better.

[-] mesamunefire@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago

A nap does sound good.

[-] sexy_peach@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

People also say they googled, unfortunately

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

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

[-] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

Unfortunately now Google is ChatGPT. It provides its own shitty AI answers, and its search results have been corrupted by an ocean of slop.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

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:

  • How to install Microsoft Teams
  • How to rent servers from Amazon
  • How to enable all data collection on Google

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

Peertube is actually developed by a transphobic communist who turned my daughter gay. Boycott!!!

[-] hono4kami@piefed.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

At this point, ad blocker is pretty much mandatory for me, just like how antivirus software used to be a decade ago (probably more)

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 3 points 2 weeks ago

PLEASE DISABLE YOUR AD BLOCKER! We use the revenue from annoying you to feed our starving CEO!

[-] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

This is the golden age of misinformation and you are bitching about citations?

"I used chatgpt"

[-] neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I asked ChatGPT and it says this feature was added 5 years ago! Really?

How would you phrase this differently?

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

"It looks like this feature was added 5 years ago."

If asking for confirmation, just ask for confirmation.

[-] neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week 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.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Why would anyone ask where they got the info if it is accurate?

[-] viking@infosec.pub 0 points 1 week ago

Apparently the feature was added 5 years ago.

[-] neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week 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.

[-] Eyekaytee@aussie.zone 0 points 2 weeks ago

what do you mean? it's like being angry that people bring up I googled something

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

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.

[-] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

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.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

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?"

Right: it skips the part where human intelligence and critical thinking is applied. Do you not understand how that's a fucking problem‽

[-] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

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.

[-] GrayBackgroundMusic@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

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.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Search engines and Wikipedia don't judge you for asking stupid questions either.

[-] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 weeks ago

No it'll just hallucinate shit that'll make you look dumb when you go and state it as fact.

this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2025
32 points (97.1% liked)

Fediverse

35720 readers
36 users here now

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!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS