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@gmail.com:
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@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@lists.wikimedia.org