Hello Victorioa,
Thank you for the great question!
In my humble opinion, ChatGPT is far away from producing useful
Wikipedia content. My own experience is here to see:
https://youtu.be/zKPEyxYt5kg
But anyone who wants to use the existing AI website(s) may use the AI
at pleasure and copy content from it. Finally, it is the individual
editor who is responsible for her edits.
Should we include AI in the user interface of Wikipedia? I tend to say
no. But I have to think about automatic translation services: these
are very good nowadays, and I'd actually wish one being integrated in
the Wikipedia translation tool! Of course, the human editor MUST
ALWAYS check the translation with her own eyes. But the integration
into the translation tool would be very welcome.
There is resistance against the inclusion of automatic translation,
because that would make it easier for lazy editors to abuse it. (Not
checking the translations personally.)
And that is my objection against the integration of AI text production
in Wikipedia's website: it would make it lazy editors too easy to add
dubious content.
(I know that it is a contradiction if I welcome the automatic
translation but not the AI text production, but that is partially due
to the specific structure of the translation tool.)
At the moment, AI texts often look excellent but are very unreliable.
And that makes it so dangerous.
Kind regards,
User:Ziko
P.S.: One example of todays's playing with ChatGPT. Who was
responsible for the 1933 Reichstag fire? According to AI, the national
socialists. There is proof for that.
- Oh? I learned that the historians are still arguining. So I asked
the AI: What is the proof?
- And the AI gave me some motives of the national socialists, but no
proof. Instead, the AI offered that "Georg Irminger" was a national
socialist involved in the fire, according to his own confession. But
that confession might have been made under torture.
- I wonder about the name and Google it. Google knows of several
people named Georg(e) Irminger, but all of them died before 1933. I
tell the AI that Georg Irminger does not exist!
- The AI apologizes for giving me wrong information. Instead, some
Georg Elser was involved in the fire, according to his own confession.
But that confession might have been made unter torture.
Funny aftermath: I mentioned this conversation in a Facebook group
"Digital history" (in German). One person answered: "But no, Georg
Elser was not related to the fire, he later tried to shoot Hitler!"
(Georg Elser did not try to shoot anyone, he tried to kill Hitler with
a bomb in 1939.)
Am Fr., 30. Dez. 2022 um 01:10 Uhr schrieb Victoria Coleman
<vstavridoucoleman(a)gmail.com>om>:
>
> Hi everyone. I have seen some of the reactions to the narratives generated by Chat
GPT. There is an obvious question (to me at least) as to whether a Wikipedia chat bot
would be a legitimate UI for some users. To that end, I would have hoped that it would
have been developed by the WMF but the Foundation has historically massively underinvested
in AI. That said, and assuming that GPT Open source licensing is compatible with the
movement norms, should the WMF include that UI in the product?
>
> My other question is around the corpus that Open AI is using to train the bot. It is
creating very fluid narratives that are massively false in many cases. Are they training
on Wikipedia? Something else?
>
> And to my earlier question, if GPT were to be trained on Wikipedia exclusively would
that help abate the false narratives?
>
> This is a significant matter for the community and seeing us step to it would be
very encouraging.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Victoria Coleman
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org