I've not used KDE for a very long time, are you saying that they now have shareware-style nag dialogs in KDE itself? Or is this just something on the KDE website, like Wikipedia does?
It's a desktop notification that fires once toward the end of the year. It can be disabled by the user, and distributions can also pre-disable it (some do).
> Or is this just something on the KDE website, like Wikipedia does?
In Wikipedia's case the website is the product, so I'd say it's about the same.
It's a good example. People have been fired, reprimanded, blacklisted from their field, harassed and stalked for publicly objecting to the gender identity viewpoint. It somewhat reminds me of the tactics scientologists used to suppress dissent. I'm glad that era is starting to come to an end now.
It's really not coming to an end. People still look silly for talking about things like "the gender identity viewpoint" as if it's just a matter of opinion.
I find that's a good reason, other than looking for an increase in salary, to seek out new employment opportunities every few years, while nudging your resume more towards the career you want rather than the career you've experienced.
> many cultures across the Americas and Oceania had and have non-binary systems,
As I understand it, this is because these cultures had deeply sexist ideas about how women and men should behave, so they created additional categories to shovel everyone who didn't conform into. In practice this tended to mean that gay men would be placed in some sort of "non-man" male category. So while sexuality and gender are different things, in practice they end up linked through this mechanism of othering.
These [clinical trial] failures, combined with the still-compelling reasons to think that amyloid is indeed a major part of the disease, have led to hypotheses that would square all these conflicting findings: perhaps amyloid really is the cause of Alzheimer’s, but not the form of amyloid we’ve been looking at. The real cause could be well upstream, in small soluble oligomers of the protein that are the earlier bad actors in the disease.
These have always felt like symptoms of the problem to me, so perhaps just downstream effects! Definitely not sure, obviously plenty of complexity to this one.
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.
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.
> 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.
If there's a perception of bias, where is it coming from? It's clearly perception born from extreme political bias of the performers. Addressing that sort of perception by changing the content means increasing bias.
Therefore the only logical route forward to hash out incidences of perceived bias and addressing them to expose them as the bias themselves.
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.
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.
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?
Is there some objective standard for what is biased? For many people (including Elon Musk) biased just means something that they disagree with.
When grok says something factual that Elon doesn't like, he puts his thumb on the scale and changes how grok responds (see the whole South African white 'genocide' business). So why should we trust that an LLM will objectively detect bias, when the people in charge of training that LLM prefer that it regurgitate their preferred story, rather than what is objectively true?
> Is there some objective standard for what is biased?
Generally, no.
With a limited domain of verifiable facts, you could perhaps measure a degree of deviation from fact across different questions, though how you get a distance measure for not just one question but that meaningfully aggregates across multiple is slippery without getting into subjective areas. Constructing a measure of directionality would be even harder to do objectively, too.
Summarizing all the knowledge is very very far from summarizing all that is written. All it takes is including everything published. The earth must be flat. Disease is caused by bad morals. Etc etc.
