• rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    eventually

    Sorry, not what i’m looking for in a medical infosource.

    • zzx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      Sorry, I should have clarified: they’d revert your change quickly, and your account would be banned after a few additional infractions. You think AI would be better?

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        I think a medical journal or publication with integrity would be better.

        I think one of the private pay only medical databases would be better.

        I think a medical textbook would be better.

        Wikipedia is fine for doing a book report in high school, but it’s not a stable source of truth you should be trusting with lives. You put in a team of paid medical professionals curating it, we can talk.

        • zzx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          Well then we def agree. I still think Wikipedia > LLMs though. Human supervision and all that

        • ArtificialHoldings@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Sorry but have to disagree. Look at the talk page on a math or science Wikipedia article, the people who maintain those pages are deadly serious. Medical journals and scientific publications aren’t intended to be accessible to a wider public, they’re intended to be bases for research - primary sources. Wikipedia is a digest source.