Comment on Wikimedia Foundation's plans to introduce AI-generated summaries to Wikipedia

flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

• antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Looks like the vast majority of people disagree D: I do agree that WP should consider ways to make certain articles more approachable to laymen, but this doesn’t seem to be the right approach.

  source

  • EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I am pretty rabidly anti-AI in most cases, but the use case for AI that I don’t think is a big negative is the distillation of information for simplification purposes. I am still somewhat against this in the sense that at the end of the day their summarization AI could hallucinate, and since they’ve admitted this is a solution to a problem of scale, then it’s not sensible to assume humans will be able to babysit it.

    However… there is some inherent value to the idea that people will end up using AI to summarize Wikipedia using models of dubious quality with an unknown quantity of intentionally pre-trained bias, and therefore there is some inherent value to training your own model to present the information on your site in a way that is the “most free” of slop and bias.

    source