Never worry about commie crap like public citations getting in the way of misinformation rhetoric again! (Because the LLM trained on fuckin twitter made it up lmao)

On the flipside for an actually cool non-cucked integration of LLMs with wikipedia check out this post on the localllama where the person shares their project of using a local private llm to search through a local kiwix server instance of wikipedia. https://piefed.social/post/1333130

  • Nalivai@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    The evidence for it is Wikipedia itself. If you have a concrete example of it siting something demonstrably wrong, bring it up, we can examine it here and if you are right, even fix it.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The evidence for it is Wikipedia itself

      So literally just the Holy Scripture argument: “the Bible is true, and the evidence is the Bible”

      • Nalivai@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        I can bring up a lot of wrongs with the bible. I would like you to do the same with Wikipedia. Bring an example.
        Just to be clear, since it seems it needs to be spelled out to you, I’m not saying Wikipedia is infallible, quite the opposite, it’s written by people. I’m saying there are mechanisms and culture to correct the wrongs, which means it’s better than probably any collection of knowledge humanity ever had.
        So again, if you have examples, bring them up. Until then, don’t do the regular accusatory confessions you all do, it’s very boring and predictable.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          I was going to chime in on this thread, but then I saw who it was that you’re arguing with.

          I would save my breath if I were you. Not worth the time.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          You realise that to say that Wikipedia is completely factual, you also have to hold that all of the sources that Wikipedia uses are completely factual. You really going to try that? Because Wikipedia happily uses right wing pundits and propaganda outlets as authoritative sources.

          im not saying Wikipedia is infallible

          Actually, you undeniably did: you said it “just lists facts”. You said that “Wikipedia itself is evidence that Wikipedia is factual”. You literally just said that “it’s better than any collection of knowledge humanity ever had.”

          This is how someone talks about religious scripture.

          Until then, don’t do the regular accusatory confessions you all do, it’s very boring and predictable.

          Go back to Reddit you wannabe anime villain loser. Jesus Christ, you zealots are incapable of not talking like the most bad faith smug man children alive.

          But here’s an example for your bad faith ass: Wikipedia states Israel has universal suffrage. Now let’s here your apologetic for why your holy book is correct even though it contradicts reality.___