• tehn00bi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Gross. Many of the technical articles on wiki are labors of love by talented people who do a great job breaking down complex concepts into fairly understandable terms.

  • a_person@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 hours ago

    If i have to rely on ai to read fucking wikipedia of all things then shoot me

    • ProOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Why?

      • Dave.@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Why?

        Because people should be looking to expand their knowledge by getting into the details. By handwaving those details away with an AI summary that may or may not actually summarise the article correctly, people lose the opportunity to learn.

        If your attention span or cognitive capacity can’t get you through a basic Wikipedia article you need to work on that, for your own betterment.

        If you’re reading an article and you’re lost in the weeds you should be taking a step back to simpler concepts in Wikipedia (or elsewhere) first. Don’t trust a LLM to make a coherent summary about a topic you can’t understand, because you won’t be able to tell if it’s feeding you bullshit.

      • Olap@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Because AI sucks at basically all tasks. And if I wanted the simple article I’d have visited the simple article. What you have done is denied entry to one of the most valuable resources ever created: wikipedia

      • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 hours ago

        It’s AI.

        People really despise AI over here. No matter the context.