Have you ever been reading a Wikipedia article and tapped out because it's just too dense and difficult to read? Simple English Wikipedia exists to help make articles easier to read and understand. I sometimes find myself drifting to it for technical concepts, but sometimes…
Because AI sucks at basically all tasks. And if I wanted the simple article I’d have visited the simple article. What you have done is denied entry to one of the most valuable resources ever created: wikipedia
But sometimes because of the context, as in this case, where we want info vouched for by actual humans who did research and who can be held accountable, instead of more slop.
Because people should be looking to expand their knowledge by getting into the details. By handwaving those details away with an AI summary that may or may not actually summarise the article correctly, people lose the opportunity to learn.
If your attention span or cognitive capacity can’t get you through a basic Wikipedia article you need to work on that, for your own betterment.
If you’re reading an article and you’re lost in the weeds you should be taking a step back to simpler concepts in Wikipedia (or elsewhere) first. Don’t trust a LLM to make a coherent summary about a topic you can’t understand, because you won’t be able to tell if it’s feeding you bullshit.
Thanks, I hate it
Why?
Because AI sucks at basically all tasks. And if I wanted the simple article I’d have visited the simple article. What you have done is denied entry to one of the most valuable resources ever created: wikipedia
_
It’s AI.
People really despise AI over here. No matter the context.
But sometimes because of the context, as in this case, where we want info vouched for by actual humans who did research and who can be held accountable, instead of more slop.
Because people should be looking to expand their knowledge by getting into the details. By handwaving those details away with an AI summary that may or may not actually summarise the article correctly, people lose the opportunity to learn.
If your attention span or cognitive capacity can’t get you through a basic Wikipedia article you need to work on that, for your own betterment.
If you’re reading an article and you’re lost in the weeds you should be taking a step back to simpler concepts in Wikipedia (or elsewhere) first. Don’t trust a LLM to make a coherent summary about a topic you can’t understand, because you won’t be able to tell if it’s feeding you bullshit.
You’re missing the point. Some people have, for example, dyslexia. Which is the whole point of simple wikipedia. But it’s lacking articles.
Of course there’s the danger of biased summaries by LLM training and promting.
Because reading comprehension in lazy browsing mode on lemmy, missing the accessibility part but rage-baited by AI.
On something like wikipedia I only want words that are written by humans, vouched for by individuals who are accountable for what they write.
If I want AI generated content I’ll go to an AI site.
Humans are good at writing. We literally invented it and we’re experts. I’ll stop using wikipedia if they turn into a slop heap.
deleted by creator