[tptacek]

Wikipedia is probably in the running for one of the greatest contributions to public knowledge of the past 100 years, and that's a consequence of how it functions, warts and all. I don't care how good Grok is or isn't. I'm a fan of frontier model LLMs. They don't meaningfully replace Wikipedia.

[onetimeusename]

What percent of edits on Wikipedia do you think are done by LLMs presently? It looks like there is a guide for detecting them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing . The way Wikipedia functions, LLMs can make edits. They can be detected, but unless you are saying they are useless I don't know what point you are making about an LLM contribution versus a human. That LLMs aren't good enough to make meaningful contributions yet?? That Grok is specifically the problem?

[meowface]

I fully agree. Even assuming no forced ideological bias from Elon, I doubt it would be nearly as good. I still thought it could be an interesting concept, even if I had very low hopes from the start.

[physarum_salad]

"Warts and all" says it all really. What are those warts? Who's responsibility are they?

Wikipedia is really not ideal for the LLM age where multiple perspectives can be rapidly generated. There are many topics where clusters of justified true beliefs and reasonable arguments may ALL be valid surrounding a certain topic. And no I am not talking about "flat earth" pages or other similar nonsense.

[thrance]

Do list these "alternative perspectives" that Wikipedia is allegedly unfairly silencing.

[physarum_salad]

The fact you think there are none is really hilarious!

[thrance]

The fact you're still eluding isn't very funny though. Please share just one, that we may discuss it.

[physarum_salad]

Omission by design or by accident/lack of resources can be found in most pages on wikipedia.

[thrance]

One example, just one. Please.