⚠️La Heritage Foundation intende "identificare e prendere di mira" gli editor di Wikipedia
Il think tank conservatore ha detto ai potenziali donatori che il progetto faceva parte del suo lavoro per combattere l'antisemitismo
Secondo i documenti ottenuti dal Forward , la Heritage Foundation intende “identificare e prendere di mira” i redattori volontari di Wikipedia che, a suo dire, stanno “abusando della loro posizione” pubblicando contenuti che il gruppo ritiene antisemiti
I dipendenti di Heritage, il think tank conservatore che ha prodotto il progetto politico Project 2025 per la seconda amministrazione Trump, hanno affermato che intendono utilizzare un software di riconoscimento facciale e un database di nomi utente e password hackerati per identificare i collaboratori dell'enciclopedia online, che lavorano per lo più sotto pseudonimo. Non è chiaro esattamente a quale tipo di antisemitismo l'iniziativa di Wikipedia, che non è stata precedentemente segnalata, intenda rispondere. Ma negli ultimi mesi alcuni gruppi ebraici si sono lamentati di una serie di modifiche al sito web relative a Israele, alla guerra a Gaza e alle sue ripercussioni.
forward.com/news/686797/herita…
Scoop: Heritage Foundation plans to ‘identify and target’ Wikipedia editors – The Forward
The conservative think tank told prospective donors that the project was part of its work to combat antisemitism.The Forward
𝔻𝕚𝕖𝕘𝕠 🦝🧑🏻💻🍕 likes this.
![antirez 3 hours ago | next [–]
About "people still thinking LLMs are quite useless", I still believe that the problem is that most people are exposed to ChatGPT 4o that at this point for my use case (programming / design partner) is basically a useless toy. And I guess that in tech many folks try LLMs for the same use cases. Try Claude Sonnet 3.5 (not Haiku!) and tell me if, while still flawed, is not helpful.
But there is more: a key thing with LLMs is that their ability to help, as a tool, changes vastly based on your communication ability. The prompt is the king to make those models 10x better than they are with the lazy one-liner question. Drop your files in the context window; ask very precise questions explaining the background. They work great to explore what is at the borders of your knowledge. They are also great at doing boring tasks for which you can provide perfect guidance (but that still would take you hours). The best LLMs (in my case just Claude Sonnet 3.5, I must admit) out there are able to accelerate you.
duped 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [–]
> Try Claude Sonnet 3.5 (not Haiku!) and tell me if, while still flawed, is not helpful.
It's not as helpful as Google was ten years ago. It's more helpful than Google today, because Google search has slowly been corrupted by garbage SEO and other LLM spam, including their own suggestions.
mvkel 1 hour ago | parent | next [–]
I'm surprised at the description that it's "useless" as a programming /...](https://fedi.ml/photo/preview/640/625051 "antirez 3 hours ago | next [–]
About \"people still thinking LLMs are quite useless\", I still believe that the problem is that most people are exposed to ChatGPT 4o that at this point for my use case (programming / design partner) is basically a useless toy. And I guess that in tech many folks try LLMs for the same use cases. Try Claude Sonnet 3.5 (not Haiku!) and tell me if, while still flawed, is not helpful.
But there is more: a key thing with LLMs is that their ability to help, as a tool, changes vastly based on your communication ability. The prompt is the king to make those models 10x better than they are with the lazy one-liner question. Drop your files in the context window; ask very precise questions explaining the background. They work great to explore what is at the borders of your knowledge. They are also great at doing boring tasks for which you can provide perfect guidance (but that still would take you hours). The best LLMs (in my case just Claude Sonnet 3.5, I must admit) out there are able to accelerate you.
duped 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [–]
> Try Claude Sonnet 3.5 (not Haiku!) and tell me if, while still flawed, is not helpful.
It's not as helpful as Google was ten years ago. It's more helpful than Google today, because Google search has slowly been corrupted by garbage SEO and other LLM spam, including their own suggestions.
mvkel 1 hour ago | parent | next [–]
I'm surprised at the description that it's \"useless\" as a programming /...")
Winter blue tardis
in reply to Quin • • •miki
in reply to Quin • • •