Knowledge will always be human driven

Imlisanen Jamir

In the rapidly evolving landscape of information dissemination, Wikipedia has long reigned as the go-to reference work for countless individuals seeking knowledge. However, as generative artificial intelligence (A.I.) gains prominence, concerns have arisen about the potential displacement of human-driven Wikipedia by automated counterparts. 

Some have even speculated that A.I. chatbots may replicate the historic dethroning of Encyclopedia Britannica by Wikipedia in 2005. While these concerns are valid, it is essential to consider a more nuanced perspective on the relationship between Wikipedia and generative A.I.

First and foremost, it is crucial to recognize that A.I. has already played a significant role in Wikipedia's ecosystem for nearly two decades. Automated bots have been employed to streamline various tasks, such as content review, language translation, and more. These bots have operated under the watchful eye of human editors, and their integration has been instrumental in enhancing Wikipedia's efficiency. The practicality of utilizing A.I. tools has been evident to Wikipedia contributors, who have embraced these technologies since 2002.

The emergence of large language models (LLMs), like ChatGPT, presents a new set of challenges for Wikipedia. Editors have grappled with the question of whether chatbot-generated content should be incorporated into Wikipedia articles, given the propensity of LLMs to produce misinformation. Striking a balance between leveraging the potential of generative A.I. and safeguarding the integrity of Wikipedia is a complex task. The ongoing effort to draft a policy for LLMs reflects the Wikipedia community's commitment to addressing this issue responsibly.

The proposed "take care and declare" framework for LLMs, which requires human editors to disclose their use of A.I. and take responsibility for vetting content, aligns with the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia. It mirrors the existing supervision model for bots, ensuring that human oversight remains an integral part of the editing process. While critics advocate for greater transparency in how A.I. credits its sources, most Wikipedia contributors appear less concerned about attribution, understanding that the altruistic nature of curating information for the platform supersedes individual recognition.

Generative A.I. companies, such as OpenAI, have a vested interest in maintaining Wikipedia as a primary source of training data for LLMs. They recognize that human-created content is essential for sustaining the intelligence of these models. A.I. companies' contributions to the Wikimedia Endowment demonstrate a shared commitment to preserving Wikipedia as a valuable resource.

Furthermore, the weaknesses of A.I. chatbots can lead to new use cases for Wikipedia. The introduction of the Wikipedia ChatGPT plug-in illustrates how Wikipedia can enhance the accuracy of A.I.-generated responses by serving as a filter for raw LLM output. This collaboration between Wikipedia and A.I. helps maintain the accuracy and reliability of information while improving the user experience.

Additionally, A.I. technology can assist human editors in sourcing reliable information and summarizing extensive discussions, making Wikipedia more accessible to newcomers. This integration of A.I. tools streamlines the editing process and empowers contributors, ultimately enriching the encyclopedia's content.

As the discourse surrounding A.I. often centers on concerns about job displacement, the future of volunteer Wikipedia editors may appear uncertain. However, the essence of their role has always transcended mere text generation. The heart of Wikipedia lies in community discussions, debates, and consensus-building efforts. While A.I. may automate certain repetitive tasks, the intricate, human-driven discourse that underpins Wikipedia's growth will continue to thrive.

Comments can be sent to [email protected]