no banana to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world • 3 months agoRIP in pieceslemmy.worldimagemessage-square145fedilinkarrow-up1927arrow-down143
arrow-up1884arrow-down1imageRIP in pieceslemmy.worldno banana to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world • 3 months agomessage-square145fedilink
minus-square@uzay@infosec.publinkfedilink33•3 months agoThe difference being that on wikipedia you could use the sources on there while AI makes those up as well
minus-square@AA5B@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink6•3 months agoA more important reason is teachers let you use Wikipedia sources, while even valid ai content is “not your work”
minus-square@Feathercrown@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish0•3 months agoWell, we do have AI that cites sources now, but it’s still not completely accurate.
minus-square@deegeese@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilink16•3 months agoI remember an AI that wrote a legal motion and justified its arguments by citing cases it made up.
minus-square@Feathercrown@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish1•3 months agoI mean, of course. For the record, that wasn’t the type that cites its sources intrinsically as part of its response creation process, although it wouldn’t be immune to hallucinations even if it was.
The difference being that on wikipedia you could use the sources on there while AI makes those up as well
A more important reason is teachers let you use Wikipedia sources, while even valid ai content is “not your work”
Well, we do have AI that cites sources now, but it’s still not completely accurate.
I remember an AI that wrote a legal motion and justified its arguments by citing cases it made up.
I mean, of course. For the record, that wasn’t the type that cites its sources intrinsically as part of its response creation process, although it wouldn’t be immune to hallucinations even if it was.