←back to thread

Tim Bray on Grokipedia

(www.tbray.org)
175 points Bogdanp | 5 comments | 31 Oct 25 21:41 UTC | HN request time: 0.129s | source
Show context
tptacek ◴[31 Oct 25 21:53 UTC] No.45777117[source]▶
Why give it oxygen?
replies(6): >>45777142 #>>45777160 #>>45777311 #>>45777327 #>>45777329 #>>45777411 #
bebb ◴[31 Oct 25 22:31 UTC] No.45777411[source]▶
Because it's a genuinely good idea, and hopefully one for which the execution will be improved upon over time.

In theory, using LLMs to summarize knowledge could produce a less biased and more comprehensive output than human-written encyclopedias.

Whether Grokipedia will meet that challenge remains to be seen. But even if it doesn't, there's opportunity for other prospective encyclopedia generators to do so.

replies(2): >>45777827 #>>45777850 #
epistasis ◴[31 Oct 25 23:30 UTC] No.45777850[source]▶
I don't why an LLM would be better in theory. The Wikipedia process is created to manage bias. LLMs are created to repeat the input data, and will therefore be quite biased towards the training data.

Humans looking through sources, applying knowledge of print articles and real world experiences to sift through the data, that seems far more valuable.

replies(1): >>45778289 #
smitty1e ◴[01 Nov 25 00:47 UTC] No.45778289[source]▶
> The Wikipedia process is created to manage bias. LLMs are created to repeat the input data, and will therefore be quite biased towards the training data.

The perception of bias in Wikipedia remains, and if LLMs can detect and correct for bias, then Grokipedia seems at least a theoretical win.

I'm happy with at least a set of links for further research on a topic of interest.

replies(4): >>45778503 #>>45778528 #>>45781138 #>>45782587 #
1. thrance ◴[01 Nov 25 12:30 UTC] No.45781138[source]▶
I fail to imagine how putting Wikipedia in the hands of an ideologically captured mega-billionaire will help the fight against bias. The owner of Grokipedia has shown times and times again that he has no regards for truth, and likes to advertise the many false things he believes in.

The technology behind it doesn't matter. Show me the incentives and I'll tell you the results: Wikipedia is decentralized, Grokipedia has a single owner.

replies(1): >>45783658 #
2. smitty1e ◴[01 Nov 25 17:47 UTC] No.45783658[source]▶
To use your terminology, the perception that Wikipedia is "ideologically captured" stands.
replies(1): >>45783800 #
3. thrance ◴[01 Nov 25 17:59 UTC] No.45783800[source]▶
How so? Because the community collectively refuses to host antivax or climate denialism propaganda? You can find these subjects on there btw, just with a mention correctly labelling them as falsehoods.

I'm yet to see conservatives bring up a single subject that Wikipedia allegedly silences out of ideology, that is not an obviously false conspiracy theory. In this, Wikipedia may appear to have a left-wing bias, but only because the modern right has gotten so divorced from reality that not relaying their propaganda feels like bias against them.

replies(1): >>45792074 #
4. smitty1e ◴[02 Nov 25 17:52 UTC] No.45792074{3}[source]▶
> "climate denialism propaganda"

Q.E.D.

replies(1): >>45793111 #
5. thrance ◴[02 Nov 25 20:25 UTC] No.45793111{4}[source]▶
Oh, you don't believe in climate change. Well, there we go. This explains that. Conservative propaganda has made you unable to distinguish truth from obvious lies, hence why you think Wikipedia is so biased. Have you considered your own biases?
replies(1): >>45793869 #