The pure ChatGPT output would probably be garbage. The dataset will be full of all manner of sources (together with their inherent biases) together with spin, untruths and outright parody and it’s not apparent that there is any kind of curation or quality assurance on the dataset (please correct me if I’m wrong).

I don’t think it’s a good tool for extracting factual information from. It does seem to be good at synthesising prose and helping with writing ideas.

I am quite interested in things like this where the output from a “knowledge engine” is paired with something like ChatGPT - but it would be for eg writing a science paper rather than news.

Exactly. The data harvest has had years in the making.

Indeed. The key word is “publish”. Social media companies and their legal teams have been fairly effective at influencing the thinking around who exactly is doing the publishing when something is posted.

Why don’t we take a look at how the plastics industry handled the public? Here’s Climate Town (YouTube link).

Can you recall which country they were based in?

For me there isn’t one; I tend not to ask people to do things that I wouldn’t do and as a team leader I’m aware that those around me are learning through observing me - I don’t want them to learn bad habits so actually their presence keeps me in check.

Playing devil’s advocate is done in the open; OP is describing something more covert.

Hmmm.

Sega is a subsidiary of Sega Sammy Holdings. Sammy is a major developer of pachinko machines.

I wonder where this is going?

Problem is they even with paying the third party app gets an inferior experience (no polls, nothing marked NSFW).

The last and only printer that I bought from HP worked well and didn’t pull any shenanigans, it was a Laserjet 5L.

Since then, feedback from colleagues and what I’ve seen from reviews and tech communities put me off buying HP again. Between their cloud printing, their inkjet cartridge verification and the USB ports covered in stickers and now this…

The printer scene: https://youtu.be/N9wsjroVlu8

Either something is happening acutely, or there’s something atypical / different about your setup.

The feature has been present for a long time and multiple instances use it. If it failed regularly, the amount of complaints we would see here and on other instances, and the headache the dev and admin teams would have on the back of all the support tickets, would be inescapable.

There is some variation across disciplines; I do think that in general the process does catch a lot of frank rubbish (and discourages submission of obvious rubbish), but from time to time I do come across inherently flawed work in so-called “high impact factor” and allegedly “prestigious” journals.

In the end, even after peer review, you need to have a good understanding of the field and to have developed and applied your critical appraisal skills.

Yes. A senior colleague sometimes tongue-in-cheek referred to it as Pee Review.

I thought Captcha tests were being used to train image recognition systems no?

Good bot. Do we do that here?

That crab mentality (crabs in a bucket) can be hard to shake but it’s got to go. The Boondocks explained it nicely (short SFW extract from an otherwise NSFW TV programme here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipg4EL_JUyE)

Yeah well. Rabbits are cool.

I see your point but I don’t agree with removing the post history or otherwise hiding it. For better or worse, post history is part of the social construct.

Think of it another way: hang out in a community long enough and you’ll have lived through the post history of other participants anyway.

I have seen this go badly and to reiterate I do appreciate the sentiment: I used to be very active on a Reddit wristwatch sub - people who had previously posted in subs related to counterfeit watches often got a hard time whenever they posted in other places (one sub in particular). It seemed that some commenters could never accept that some people had both “reps” and “gens”, or that some people wanted to have a good knowledge of “reps” (to avoid being fleeced on the second hand market, for instance).

Fortunately, there were enough level-headed folk (and more reasonable subs) that didn’t adopt this attitude.

We can choose to look or not look and we can choose whether to act or not act on what we find. And one way or the other the post history is there anyway.

I pay no attention to post history when it comes to voting behaviour; posts are as they are. I’m not much of a downvoter; it’s upvote or nothing unless a post is straight up awful inappropriate for the community it is in.

If it’s a niche subject that I’m interested in, I look at their post history in case they’ve found discussions that I’ve missed.

If it’s a particularly good, funny, extreme or otherwise “out there” post I do look at the post history for entertainment value, learning or just morbid curiosity.