felix stalder

Wikipedia now needs to have a "WikiProject AI Cleanup". They should send Sam Altman a massive bill for all their extra, unnecessary work.

I wouldn't be surprised if, on balance, cleaning up after Generative AI produced more cost than using Generative AI ever saved. Unfortunately, probably not for the same people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_AI_Cleanup

Wikipedia:WikiProject AI Cleanup - Wikipedia

Oct 3, 2024 at 10:58amWeb
Show threadDonnodubusOct 3, 2024
@festal I almost felt bad for Wikipedia, until I got to the part where it emphasizes that this project is NOT meant to restrict the use of AI in any way.
Show threadÁsthar con té 🍵⛤ (Elle/They)Oct 3, 2024
@donnodubus @festal I was about to say this.
Show threadmirabilosOct 3, 2024

@festal @asthargf @donnodubus aaaaaaaah!

Someone better get a backup of Wikipedia as of end of 2019 or so up in readonly mode. All language versions ideally, and with Wikitionary please.

Show threadMx. Eddie ROct 3, 2024
@donnodubus @festal
Lol! Omfg that's terrible.
I was ready to be sympathetic, but you know what? They want to allow GenAI, they made their bed. It was a good experiment, sad how they let it end.
Show threadjo the disgracedOct 4, 2024

@silvermoon82 @donnodubus @festal Keep in mind that even though LLMs aren't explicitly banned, the people using them will almost always fall afoul of some other policy.

For example, they'll fail to disclose that they used AI, or they won't cite sources, or the sources cited won't match the text, and all of those things would violate policy.

Now, if they're managing to make actual constructive edits that fully comply with policy...

Edit: personally I think a blanket ban on LLM generated content would be a good thing, and I'd like to see it.

Show thread-> @haileys.questOct 3, 2024
@donnodubus @festal tbf, that's a separate decision that has to be made in its own process. Someone more in tune with rule-setting procedures on Wikipedia might be able to help us find where that was probably already decided?
Show threadJavawookieOct 3, 2024

@festal
And there you have what I see as the real issue with AI.
certainly, everyone talks about copyrights and how AI feeds off other work.
Fewer people talk about the issue with the energy it takes to produce something usable and the environmental impact.
What almost no one seems to notice is the amount of junk AI is capable of pushing out into the internet, feeding new generations of AI, until, after a few more cycles, the amount of usable information available becomes very hard to find.

The next tech-billionnaires will undoubtedly have found a way to filter that AI junk and provide a usable internet - for the rich & paying, of course.

Show threadAlberto CotticaOct 3, 2024
@festal good grief
Show threadAndyDeardenOct 3, 2024
@festal yet another negative externality dumped on us all by the techbros.
Show threadPrincess UnikittyOct 3, 2024
@festal
A whole team to fight the new generation of SPAM bots
Show threadJacky The HamsterOct 3, 2024
@festal Imagine having to evaluate the response to a call for proposals for government funding... It was already a bullshit job, but now with AI slop spamming the proposal systems?
Show threadLazarou Monkey Terror 🚀💙🌈Oct 3, 2024
@festal it's data pollution, they should bill Altman like you would a fossil fuel producer after an oil spill.
Show threadNiniOct 3, 2024
@festal Right... if they're just about cleaning up after LLMs spewing garbage and not doing anything about these automated copyvio machines making work for them then I have no idea what they're going to achieve here. Helping to build a better machine-generated article I guess? Figure they're dealing with the symptom and not the disease.
Show threadjailandradeOct 3, 2024
@festal mira @koffer
Show threadKai Oct 3, 2024

@festal to those clamoring for a full ban in generative ai on Wikipedia I ask ¿how would such a ban be enforced?

I'm asking for real, I don't like gen ai either but a full ban seems kind of impossible to enforce, too many false negatives and false positives...

Show threadfelix stalderOct 3, 2024
@KaiserOfNone I don't think you can do this technically. I think you need to establish a strong culture not to use it and ask people to adhere to this rule. There are plenty of other rules on WP. But even in the best case, it will require manual clean up, even more admin tasks.
Show threadLawrenceOct 3, 2024
@festal @KaiserOfNone Right now I think Wikipedia is trying to avoid the hot-button parts of the issue by emphasizing its already strong culture that information must be accurate, verifiable, and non-promotional. So there’s no need to waste time on the impossible question of proving an AI was involved; whether someone writes garbage by themselves or with an LLM, the garbage has to go.
Show threadPG&E Delenda EstOct 3, 2024
@festal the page about the I Ching being on the ai cleanup page is extremely funny to me.
Show threadGonçaloOct 3, 2024
@festal
This is just on the English language version, though. Wikipedia has been fighting all sorts of misinformation, sloppy automatic translations, spam, undisclosed paid editors, etc. Not accepting AI generated content up front may be difficult because detection is difficult.
Show threadAntiroo 🔞Oct 3, 2024
@festal
This is depressing as hell