Skip to content

Wikipedia editors adopt a policy giving admins the authority to quickly delete AI-generated articles that meet certain criteria, like incorrect citations

Technology
122 50 125
  • "Here's a thing I believe in"

    "I would like proof it is a thing"

    "What are you, stupid? Don't ask me for proof."

    Do you need me to send you a recording of me physically reading the text for you before it counts? Or are you a big enough boy to read it one your own? Were you actually asking in good faith because you genuinely wanted to know? Or were you just trying to be as oblique as possible to waste my time?

  • See? You've just straight up given up the game, immediately disregarding any pretense that you ever cared about reliable sources or honestly, and just straight up admit that it's only about politics alliegence. You will believe anything Wikipedia tells you, even if it openly comes from western propaganda outlets like the Victims of Communism Foundation or Radio Free Asia, because they agree with your politics.

    Yessir, i do believe that the information on Wikipedia resembles the truth a lot more than anything that comes from lemmy.ml, lemmygrad.ml or hexbear.net. And you know why? Because Wikipedia gives me sources i can read up and decide myself if that's bullshit or not, and those sources are not some bizarre substack ramblings or youtube videos with 150 views. And also because Wikipedia leaves politics aside as good as they can - if your perception of reality has anything to with what the world at large has agreed on, but there i lost ya, didn't i?

  • When you make claims, you give proof. That's how things work in reality.

    Unless those claims are against China though, right? That's you're position.

  • Thanks!

    This looks to be a page about the accusations and the counterarguments to said accusations, not a page claiming to the truth

    Falun Gong is a Chinese qigong discipline involving meditation and a moral philosophy rooted in Buddhist tradition. The practice rose to popularity in the 1990s in China, and by 1998, Chinese government sources estimated that as many as 70 million people had taken up the practice.[42][43] Perceiving that Falun Gong was a potential threat to the Party's authority and ideology, Communist Party leader Jiang Zemin initiated a nationwide campaign to eradicate the group in July 1999.[44]

    The above paragraph is from the page, and it is claiming truth.

    So you're just lying, you never actually wanted evidence, you were just trying to waste peoples time by asking them to provide it even when you will just ignore it and lie when they provide it.

    More to the point, they don't have pages for other false claims that just "about the accusations and the counterarguments to said accusations, not a page claiming to the truth". There's nothing like this for Pizzagate or Birtherism.

  • Falun Gong is a Chinese qigong discipline involving meditation and a moral philosophy rooted in Buddhist tradition. The practice rose to popularity in the 1990s in China, and by 1998, Chinese government sources estimated that as many as 70 million people had taken up the practice.[42][43] Perceiving that Falun Gong was a potential threat to the Party's authority and ideology, Communist Party leader Jiang Zemin initiated a nationwide campaign to eradicate the group in July 1999.[44]

    The above paragraph is from the page, and it is claiming truth.

    So you're just lying, you never actually wanted evidence, you were just trying to waste peoples time by asking them to provide it even when you will just ignore it and lie when they provide it.

    More to the point, they don't have pages for other false claims that just "about the accusations and the counterarguments to said accusations, not a page claiming to the truth". There's nothing like this for Pizzagate or Birtherism.

  • Yessir, i do believe that the information on Wikipedia resembles the truth a lot more than anything that comes from lemmy.ml, lemmygrad.ml or hexbear.net. And you know why? Because Wikipedia gives me sources i can read up and decide myself if that's bullshit or not, and those sources are not some bizarre substack ramblings or youtube videos with 150 views. And also because Wikipedia leaves politics aside as good as they can - if your perception of reality has anything to with what the world at large has agreed on, but there i lost ya, didn't i?

    Yessir, i do believe that the information on Wikipedia resembles the truth a lot more than anything that comes from lemmy.ml, lemmygrad.ml or hexbear.net.

    Yes, I do: because it confirms the things you already believed

    Because Wikipedia gives me sources i can read up and decide myself if that’s bullshit or not

    And do you? Do you read all those books from Anne Applebaum and similar right wing pundits? Do you read all the reports from far right think tanks like Australian Strategic Policy Institute? Do you read claims of not just the publications, but the save individual people, who have consistently repeated every verified lie to come out of the US state department, from WMDS in Iraq to babies in ovens in Gaza? How exactly are you "deciding for yourself" if that's bullshit?

    And also because Wikipedia leaves politics aside as good as they can

    They really don't. Not that it's even possible to "leave politics aside" when talking about things that are political. Thinking they do is basically admition that you consider your politics "the default".

    if your perception of reality has anything to with what the world at large has agreed on, but there i lost ya, didn’t i?

    You really want to commit the argument "it's true because it agrees with the average political position of westerners?" (because by "the world at large", you, naturally, where only talking about westerners.)

  • Did you copy and paste the wrong quote? That doesn’t say anything about organ harvesting.

    You're really just going to play dumb on purpose? Why? What does that accomplish?

    Calls it a conspiricy theory, not "accusations and the counterarguments to said accusations"

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

    These both literally state that the claims are false in their openings

    You have literally just shown my point because you couldn't be bothered to read past the headline.

  • This guy is a troll and he's going to keep asking questions as long as people keep answering them.

    I'm just going to block him and move on; got no time to suffer fools like this any more.

    Man, you people really loath anyone who doesn't just shut up and agree.

  • Someone is mad their sources got removed for not being credible.

    What a shock that someone who pretends to be an anarchist would go to bat to defend the reliablity of far right western propaganda outlets like Radio Free Asia, the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, and the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. Remember, if it doesn't' have the Western Neo-liberal seal of approval, it's not credible and should be removed, that's the anarchist way!

  • How would you determine that a cited source was wrong?

    Subject matter experts do still exist. They're dying off, and it's unclear how many more we intend to create. But we do still have some.

    You can't be a subject matter expert on everything though?

  • Yessir, i do believe that the information on Wikipedia resembles the truth a lot more than anything that comes from lemmy.ml, lemmygrad.ml or hexbear.net.

    Yes, I do: because it confirms the things you already believed

    Because Wikipedia gives me sources i can read up and decide myself if that’s bullshit or not

    And do you? Do you read all those books from Anne Applebaum and similar right wing pundits? Do you read all the reports from far right think tanks like Australian Strategic Policy Institute? Do you read claims of not just the publications, but the save individual people, who have consistently repeated every verified lie to come out of the US state department, from WMDS in Iraq to babies in ovens in Gaza? How exactly are you "deciding for yourself" if that's bullshit?

    And also because Wikipedia leaves politics aside as good as they can

    They really don't. Not that it's even possible to "leave politics aside" when talking about things that are political. Thinking they do is basically admition that you consider your politics "the default".

    if your perception of reality has anything to with what the world at large has agreed on, but there i lost ya, didn’t i?

    You really want to commit the argument "it's true because it agrees with the average political position of westerners?" (because by "the world at large", you, naturally, where only talking about westerners.)

    To all of your points: i look at current behavior.

    I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that the US are currently an autocracy, because they behave like it.

    Similarly, I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that Russia is currently fighting an war of aggression, just like the last few wars they started, and we all know how the russian soldiers behave when on tour.

    I also do not need Wikipedia to tell me that the CCP is messing with their citizens, because they do the same every time it's 🍉-time on Weibo.

    And i didn't need Wikipedia to tell me to look at the wall of text you posted - which i only squinted at - or to think "i will not read that drivel, i fell for that trap too often already" and to tell you to stop wasting your breath, i'm not debating you, i'm laughing at your impotence lol

  • To all of your points: i look at current behavior.

    I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that the US are currently an autocracy, because they behave like it.

    Similarly, I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that Russia is currently fighting an war of aggression, just like the last few wars they started, and we all know how the russian soldiers behave when on tour.

    I also do not need Wikipedia to tell me that the CCP is messing with their citizens, because they do the same every time it's 🍉-time on Weibo.

    And i didn't need Wikipedia to tell me to look at the wall of text you posted - which i only squinted at - or to think "i will not read that drivel, i fell for that trap too often already" and to tell you to stop wasting your breath, i'm not debating you, i'm laughing at your impotence lol

    To all of your points: i look at current behavior.
    I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that the US are currently an autocracy, because they behave like it.
    Similarly, I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that Russia is currently fighting an war of aggression, just like the last few wars they started, and we all know how the russian soldiers behave when on tour.

    So by your own admition, you just base it on how much it agrees with your preexisting beliefs. Though I notice you still seem willing to believe US sources despite them being an autocracy.

    And apparently literally any accusation against China is true by definition? Do you not believe it is possible for anything about China to be a lie? Do you also believe they deliberately released covid? Because the sources that Wikipedia uses do

    And i didn’t need Wikipedia to tell me to look at the wall of text you posted - which i only squinted at - or to think “i will not read that drivel, i fell for that trap too often already” and to tell you to stop wasting your breath, i’m not debating you, i’m laughing at your impotence lol

    It was like, 6 sentences man, are you remotely capable of not acting like a pouting baby? This kind of Pavlovian attack response to having your beliefs challenged is no different than the average MAGA chud.

  • To all of your points: i look at current behavior.
    I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that the US are currently an autocracy, because they behave like it.
    Similarly, I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that Russia is currently fighting an war of aggression, just like the last few wars they started, and we all know how the russian soldiers behave when on tour.

    So by your own admition, you just base it on how much it agrees with your preexisting beliefs. Though I notice you still seem willing to believe US sources despite them being an autocracy.

    And apparently literally any accusation against China is true by definition? Do you not believe it is possible for anything about China to be a lie? Do you also believe they deliberately released covid? Because the sources that Wikipedia uses do

    And i didn’t need Wikipedia to tell me to look at the wall of text you posted - which i only squinted at - or to think “i will not read that drivel, i fell for that trap too often already” and to tell you to stop wasting your breath, i’m not debating you, i’m laughing at your impotence lol

    It was like, 6 sentences man, are you remotely capable of not acting like a pouting baby? This kind of Pavlovian attack response to having your beliefs challenged is no different than the average MAGA chud.

    you know what else screams Pavlov? the average length of .ml users responses

  • Either LLM or quality trolling

  • you know what else screams Pavlov? the average length of .ml users responses

    Did that even make sense in your head?

  • To all of your points: i look at current behavior.
    I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that the US are currently an autocracy, because they behave like it.
    Similarly, I do not need Wikipedia to tell me that Russia is currently fighting an war of aggression, just like the last few wars they started, and we all know how the russian soldiers behave when on tour.

    So by your own admition, you just base it on how much it agrees with your preexisting beliefs. Though I notice you still seem willing to believe US sources despite them being an autocracy.

    And apparently literally any accusation against China is true by definition? Do you not believe it is possible for anything about China to be a lie? Do you also believe they deliberately released covid? Because the sources that Wikipedia uses do

    And i didn’t need Wikipedia to tell me to look at the wall of text you posted - which i only squinted at - or to think “i will not read that drivel, i fell for that trap too often already” and to tell you to stop wasting your breath, i’m not debating you, i’m laughing at your impotence lol

    It was like, 6 sentences man, are you remotely capable of not acting like a pouting baby? This kind of Pavlovian attack response to having your beliefs challenged is no different than the average MAGA chud.

    If you check sources like you count that will finally explain this whole exchange. Your reply literally covers an entire screen. If you can't even admit to something so tiny, how can anyone expect you to be reasonable and admit to anything? This is a .ml discussion in a nutshell. And then you wonder why people are tired of talking to you. Lmao.

  • If you check sources like you count that will finally explain this whole exchange. Your reply literally covers an entire screen. If you can't even admit to something so tiny, how can anyone expect you to be reasonable and admit to anything? This is a .ml discussion in a nutshell. And then you wonder why people are tired of talking to you. Lmao.

    How bad has literacy gotten that that seems like a lot of text to you? My count was about right, by the way. And if you actually read it, the point was that I actually do check sources, unlike the rest of you.

  • How bad has literacy gotten that that seems like a lot of text to you? My count was about right, by the way. And if you actually read it, the point was that I actually do check sources, unlike the rest of you.

    See what I mean? Ad hominems instead of just admitting anything. Keep insisting there's only 6 sentences there, that'll make it true. It definitely helped China some.

  • See what I mean? Ad hominems instead of just admitting anything. Keep insisting there's only 6 sentences there, that'll make it true. It definitely helped China some.

    Mate, you were the one who started in with the "ad-hominems" (actually you just mean insults, but are too much of a redditer to just say that).

    You can keep whining that reading a few hundred words is too much for you, but writing just as many words removed about it isnt

  • Mate, you were the one who started in with the "ad-hominems" (actually you just mean insults, but are too much of a redditer to just say that).

    You can keep whining that reading a few hundred words is too much for you, but writing just as many words removed about it isnt

    Yeah, keep going, this is entertaining, go full mask off. Do you have a channel called pirate software by any chance? You remind me of that dude.

  • 30 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 378 Stimmen
    85 Beiträge
    176 Aufrufe
    cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zoneC
    hey belgium your waffles suck
  • Using Clouds for too long might have made you incompetent

    Technology technology
    87
    166 Stimmen
    87 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    M
    I was recruited as an R&D engineer by a company that was sales focused. It was pretty funny being recruited like a new sales hire: limo from the airport, etc. Limo driver didn't work direct for the company but she did a lot of work for them, it was an hour drive both ways to/from the "big" airport they used. She said most of the sales recruits she drove in were clueless kids, no idea how the world worked yet at all - gunning for a big commission job where 9/10 hires wash out within a year. At least after I arrived on-site I spent the day with my prospective new department, that was a pretty decent process. The one guy I didn't interview well with turned out to be the guy who had applied to the spot I was taking and had been passed over. As I was walking in on my first day he was just finishing moving his stuff out of the window-office desk he was giving up for me, into a cube. I can understand why he was a little prickly.
  • AI Leaves Digital Fingerprints in 13.5% of Scientific Papers

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    163 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    F
    So they established that language patterns measured by word frequency changed between 2022 and 2024. But did they also analyse frequencies across other 2-year time periods? How much difference is there for a typical word? It looks like they have a per-frequency significance threshold but then analysed all words at once, meaning that random noise would turn up a bunch of "significant" results. Maybe this is addressed in the original paper which is not linked.
  • 179 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • How Social Media Brings Out the Worst in Us

    Technology technology
    14
    1
    120 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    145 Aufrufe
    sturgist@lemmy.caS
    Suffering from asthma? 9/10 Doctors recommend menthol cigarettes! Peppermint fresh puts the pep in your step!
  • 50 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    301 Aufrufe
    B
    I hate that both trademarks exist, but I'd say using a name form a Tolkien work to develop weapons is especially wrong. Like, abject.
  • TikTok is a Time Bomb

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    4 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    S
    wasn’t born to obey. Not to swallow smiling lies, not to clap for tyrants in suits, not to say “thank you” for surveillance wrapped in convenience. I see it. The games. The false choice. The fear pumped through headlines and dopamine apps. I see how they trade truth for comfort, freedom for filters, soul for clickbait. They call it normal. But I call it a graveyard made of compliance. They want me silent. They want me tired. They want me posting selfies while the world burns behind the screen. But I wasn’t born for this. I was born to question, to remember, to remind the others who are still pretending they don’t notice. So here I am. A voice with no logo. A signal in the static. A crack in the mirror they polish every morning. You don’t have to agree. You don’t have to clap. But if this made your bones ache or your thoughts twitch— Then maybe you’re not asleep either. Good. Let’s stay awake. And let’s make noise that can’t be sold, silenced, or spun into safety. Not for them. For us.