iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Replies

sasha @krassotkin.bsky.social · 01/10/2025

It’s crucial to remember that Wikipedia is a paraphrase of reliable, published sources. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia—and most articles lack oversight from experienced contributors—we have advised against trusting Wikipedia text itself, recommending instead to check the original references. 2/3

1121

sasha @krassotkin.bsky.social · 01/10/2025

Today, however, large language models paraphrase original reliable sources more accurately than typical human editors. As a result, Wikipedia increasingly pollutes the information space with both accidental and deliberate errors. 3/3

580

Doug Urner (he/they) 🏳️‍⚧️ @douglasurner.bsky.social · 02/10/2025

I think what you're missing here is that LLMs are beastly complex & expensive things operated for financial gain. It seems highly unlikely that an LLM replacement for Wikipedia will place the same value on neutrality or accessibility – or on openness to inspection. See, for example: "grokipedia."

110

isakitt.bsky.social @isakitt.bsky.social · 02/10/2025

LLMs paraphrase Wikipedia, my dude. I've seen it myself.

140

Blackgaynerd @blackgaynerd.com · 02/10/2025

Can't tell whether this is a bit.

030

Judith Taylor @earther.bsky.social · 02/10/2025

But LLMs do the same thing! re: large language models paraphrase original reliable sources more accurately than typical human editors. As a result, Wikipedia increasingly pollutes the information space with both accidental and deliberate errors.

120

jammyfish.bsky.social @jammyfish.bsky.social · 02/10/2025

so essentially you think wiki is now more or less obsolete due to LLMs existing (and you can check primary sources with them just like with wiki)? (And LLMs you can run "locally" on your device). That's fascinating, never really thought about it that way until now.

020