I think Ai is not the issue here. SEO on the other hand very much. It’s not like any one ever went to stackoverflow to find a solution, it was just that they were the google results for a lot of things
Not if the perception of Wikipedia is „truthful“ and „reliable“.
I’m saying neither, but in that case the article on Wikipedia puts weight behind the statements on the webpage.
I do see your argument: „But it would be adjusted to reflect the truth about it“. Honestly I don’t know enough about Wikipedia to agree or deny it. But given the amount of articles on it, i would lean in the direction that the motivation of a single few would win over the curators.
Which means applying a vector that cannot be influenced by those few.
I could accept that there shouldn’t be content for children on the internet, at all, to make this an easy sell.
Parents will not solve this. They would need to first care and then to be as tech savvy as the people in this forum. And then all the content would need to be attributed correctly. If if if, and here we are
I don’t disagree with what you are saying but it isn’t a solution to the problem. And the problem is about the children.
Without trying to offend you, but you are arguing this as: we don’t need to regulate alcohol or drugs because experiences, for everyone, will be better in the end…
Maybe this is about time. It’s pretty clear that the internet as such is not and never has been for children.
But the way it is done is weird for sure.
But how do you do it in a way that it isn’t a burden on the parents or peer pressure the issue that breaks the intent?
Or is your point that the internet should be used by children?
If so how do you propose restricting the harmful content?
From my point of view we are in the digital Middle Ages. We do not yet understand if this global connection is actually being good or bad in the long run. The only thing that starts to crystallize is that it isn’t great for children. Specifically social media, especially especially people gaining access to children on troves to spread ideology.
So how to solve it. And „I don’t like the current approach“ without having a better idea is not a solution.
My current feeling about blogging is, that it more then anything else is we’re certian knowledge of AI came from. The arguments for blogging being the thing again also started at the same time AI got traction.
Just identify the bloggers that know their craft, weight them height. And you got yourself a step change in LLM competency.
The generic repository "pattern" is the prime example of this. There might be CRUD operations shared between repositories, but they should not be that base of every repository.
I've seen this so many times, because in the beginning the CRUD stuff is what you code over and over again and then suddenly business logic emerges and everything breaks down, but the repository prevails because sunk cost fallacy ...