Wouldn't it be funny if it was a Chatgpt powered site.
ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
11–20 of 301 posts
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#12The enshittening of transmitting text over the internet
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#13Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#14[flagged]
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#15> When we turn the job of creating the first draft of the thing over to ChatGPT we risk removing the “figuring shit out” part of everyone’s career-path. And we get away with that while we still have people who have figured shit out.
That's the main problem from my point of view.
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#16> Therefore, our safeguard is constrained by time, knowledge, and resources. The problem then is that if that safeguard fails and A-Grade Bullshit is taken by an author using the AI as a research assistant, put into a research paper, book chapter, or online article, and is then cited. That becomes potential training data for the AI if it is released into the world or has the window of its training data set extended.
I don't see the value in GPT models for this kind of use. I see the value in like, translation work, or summaries and other transformations, and that GPT works best when in concert with search engines, document embeddings, or knowledge databases like Wolfram Alpha. It's good at predicting more text which is useful in many different kinds of contexts but not in all contexts. It's pretty clear that it is untrustworthy for factual responses like quotes and population counts but that problem goes away if the actual factual data is included in the prompt!
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#17If you think of the knowledge base of the internet as a living thing, ChatGPT is a like a virus that now threatens its life.
This is the same process SEO spam caused for search - it hampers the nature by which things function and the river needs to reroute (pagerank then usage metadata) to replace the lost signal.
ChatGPT is more of an existential threat because it will propagate to infect other knowledge bases. Luke Wikipedia relies on "published" facts as an authority, but ChatGPT output is going to wind up as a source one way or another. And worse, then ChatGPT will digest its own excrement, worsening its own results further.
All signs point to this strengthening the value of curation and authenticated sources.
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#18> Therefore, our safeguard is constrained by time, knowledge, and resources. The problem then is that if that safeguard fails and A-Grade Bullshit is taken by an author using the AI as a research assistant, put into a research paper, book chapter, or online article, and is then cited. That becomes potential training data for the AI if it is released into the world or has the window of its training data set extended.…
> knowledge databases like Wolfram Alpha
Isn't that where ChatGPT would actually be worse overall? It's been shown to give semi-accurate data very often while sounding very confident about it.
When people require precise answers and it gives almost correct answer, it seems the general feeling is of amazement. I don't share that feeling. I hope nobody is using it for serious work without a human vetting the output.
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#19If you think of the knowledge base of the internet as a living thing, ChatGPT is a like a virus that now threatens its life. This is the same process SEO spam caused for search - it hampers the nature by which things function and the river needs to reroute (pagerank then usage metadata) to replace the lost signal. ChatGPT is more of an existential threat because it will propagate to infect other knowledge bases. Luke…
[deleted]
Re: ChatGPT and the Enshittening of Knowledge
#20Saying middle of the road shit and adding bullshit sounds like every politician.