271–280 of 285 posts
It won't generate a coherent fictional world, but this could be a great starting point for coming up with some ideas for world building for an author.
Love this idea. I'm curious as to the prompt used and code behind it. I could see this being fun with some tweaks as well. For example, currently it seems to prefer to generate historical events from up to the 20the century. I could see a sci-fi version of this being pretty interesting. It won't generate a coherent fictional world, but this could be a great starting point for coming up with some ideas for world build…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't. And, I'd think less of anyone who does make that argument. Anyone of reasonable intelligence can easily tell this is a parody of an encyclopedia. Saying this is bad for the web is like saying The Onion is bad for the web.
scrapers/ai summaries are not of “reasonable intelligence” when deciding what is real and what isn’t. neither are most people, actually
Earlier quoted context omitted.
scrapers/ai summaries are not of “reasonable intelligence” when deciding what is real and what isn’t. neither are most people, actually
Even a tiny local model can tell this is a joke. No AI will ever ingest this as facts or present it as such. It is clearly labeled as fake.
Apparently it knows nothing of Age of Empires II: https://halupedia.com/wololo
Here's one I just made: https://halupedia.com/buildings-within-buildings
This is awesome, it feels a lot like the SCP Foundation wiki. Here's one I just made: https://halupedia.com/buildings-within-buildings
Only problem I'm seeing is that you'd want pages to recognise when they're talking about the same thing, so that you don't have duplicates with slightly different titles and content. You'd want to avoid it re-introducing the same concept if it could refer to an existing matching concept on another page.
E.g. if I make another page https://halupedia.com/buildings-within-buildings-2, I'd expect it to refer to /buildings-within-buildings. Currently it doesn't mention it at all.
I'd also expect /architectural-recursion to mention Archibald Plinth, since he's the author of /observations-on-architectural-recursion. Instead, it mentions Archibald Flicker.
Maybe this can be solved with some kind of graph structure?