Didn't they just pass a site-wide decision on the use of LLMs in creating/editing otherwise "human made" text?
Why do they need to take the human element out? Why would anyone want them to?
God I hope this isn't the beginning of the end for Wikipedia. They live and die on the efforts of volunteer editors (like Reddit relied on volunteer mods and third party tool devs). The fastest way to tank themselves is by driving off their volunteers with shit like this.
And it's absurdly easier to lose the good will they have than to rebuild it.
I think you should post this over to !fedigrow@lemmy.zip or one of the other communities for growing lemmy and helping new joiners. You are likely duplicating effort.
Yes, but here's the trick: No one will be sitting around at the end of your life with a checklist of what you should have accomplished.
While there's a gratification to pushing yourself and your limits, there is also gratification to be found in just being. In enjoying where you are and what you have.
Slow progress is still progress. The ability to do amazing in bursts doesn't mean that you can keep up that effort/quality constantly, which is what many "normies" and authority figures when you're young seem to miss.
You're the one who gets to choose what you try to compete at, and the older I get the more comfortable I am with just competing against my own self. Myself a day ago, a month ago, a few years ago.
No, more like "Your marketing team, sales team, the news media at large, and random hype men all insist your orange machine works amazing on any fruit if you know how to use it right. It didn't work my strawberries when I gave it all the help I could, and was outperformed by my 40 year old strawberry machine. Please stop selling the idea it works on all fruit."
This study is specifically a counter to the constant hype that these LLMs will revolutionize absolutely everything, and the constant word choices used in discussion of LLMs that imply they have reasoning capabilities.
As others have said, that's not the "banned" message. That's some overzealous automatic thing they've put in that seems to try and stop excessive traffic all coming from the same source. When it works "right" it mainly just pops up to stop people on VPNs (lots of traffic from a relatively small set of IP addresses).
It's stupid as hell, and just more poor decisions stemming from their attempts to prevent scraping by AI, but it's not a ban.
Edit: not sure why the downvote. It was originally posted by mirrorwitch, of the awful.systems instance, on the tech takes community there. Direct link: https://awful.systems/post/4558700
It also got noticed by Hacker News, which is funny to me given that the original community it was posted to is incredibly anti-HN. Also that roughly half of the comments are people who were unable to follow how it was written (funny given HN's overwhelming elitist slant). Link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44200773
If mirrorwitch doesn't want the shoutout, just say so or send me a private message and I'll take this comment down.
In my opinion, that's a massive important step to realize. While it is possible to develop coping skills and alternate tactics, people with amputated legs don't go "tomorrow morning I'm going to just push harder and do those jumping jacks!" but very very often I found myself doing the equivalent with ADHD.
Had this mixed in with the background music playlist at my wedding reception, and I got to witness an older gentleman sitting near the speaker look increasingly confused.
Yeah, I don't get this mindset from content creators. It doesn't have to be some big thing if they're worried about losing viewers and money.
Bare minimum: Uploading a video to Youtube, a Peertube instance, and to Archive.org isn't much more work than just uploading to Youtube. Put links to all three in every description with the note that video mirrors are available at these following places.
I think the real issue is that giving up Youtube means giving up a revenue stream. Not a ton of people make video content just to create stuff anymore.
Ok, but now we're changing the context, and we're back to my original point: Making Windows work for you is possible, and roughly as hard as making the switch to Linux.
But complaining that power-user functioanlity isn't easy is just... asinine. If you understand the underlying design, it becomes awfully obvious that Microsoft is far more lazy than malicious. Same end result, but it helps make the entire process of using and configuring Windows make a lot more sense.
Yeah, Linux is obviously the better choice long term. But "fixing" Windows isn't impossible, and switiching to Linux isn't a "it just works" experience. Simple shit like HDR support still isn't as plug and play as it "should" be.
So seeing people wrongly claim that doing certain things with Windows is literally impossible while they talk about dealing with similarly complex shit in Linux is frustrating. If you can do X in Linux, you are more than capable of doing Y in Windows.
You're not wrong. It shouldn't be necessary to tell Microsoft to fuck off at all. It's not an unreasonable desire to want Microsoft to fuck off with their anti-consumer bullshit.
All I'm saying is that the skills needed to make Windows work for you are roughly equivalent in difficulty to getting Linux to work for you.
Both take work, and knowledge about the underlying design to do properly. The asinine "hot takes" from both sides are largely fuelled by people spouting off without the background knowledge to understand why things are designed how they are.
Didn't they just pass a site-wide decision on the use of LLMs in creating/editing otherwise "human made" text?
Why do they need to take the human element out? Why would anyone want them to?
God I hope this isn't the beginning of the end for Wikipedia. They live and die on the efforts of volunteer editors (like Reddit relied on volunteer mods and third party tool devs). The fastest way to tank themselves is by driving off their volunteers with shit like this.
And it's absurdly easier to lose the good will they have than to rebuild it.