ChatGPT has surpassed Wikipedia in internet traffic, sparking concerns over the reliability of AI-generated content and its implications for information dissemination.
A striking graph, which went viral on Reddit last week, shows the purported percentage of internet users visiting OpenAI‘s blockbuster AI chatbot ChatGPT overtaking Wikipedia over the past two years. According to a survey compiled by UK-based market research company GWI, ‘the data suggests that ChatGPT is reaching more of the internet, more quickly, than almost any other platform in history.’
ChatGPT is a conversational AI developed by OpenAI.
It's designed to engage in dialogue and answer questions to the best of its knowledge.
The model is trained on a massive dataset of text from various sources, allowing it to generate human-like responses.
ChatGPT can provide information on a wide range of topics, from science and history to entertainment and culture.
Its conversational interface makes it an effective tool for customer service, language learning, and more.
The data suggests that ChatGPT is reaching more of the internet, more quickly, than almost any other platform in history. This massive adoption among university students has been particularly notable, with 49 percent using ChatGPT compared to 53 percent who use ‘Amazon‘.
The markets where ChatGPT sees the highest adoption include Kenya, India, the UAE, and Brazil.
Several countries have shown a significant increase in ChatGPT adoption, driven by factors such as technological advancements and growing digital literacy.
According to recent statistics, the top countries with high ChatGPT adoption rates are: The 'United States' (34% of online users), China (28%), Japan (25%), South Korea (24%), and India (22%).
These countries have invested heavily in developing their technology infrastructure, making it easier for citizens to access and utilize AI-powered tools like ChatGPT.
As a result, they have seen a significant increase in adoption rates compared to other regions.
However, it’s essential to consider the reliability of information people are seeking out online. While Wikipedia is built on prominently displayed citations, AI systems like ChatGPT often struggle to explain where their info comes from, even cooking up fake references wholesale. Moreover, generative AI has proven to be far more unreliable than Wikipedia due to widespread hallucinations and biases present in its training data.
ChatGPT's reliability is a topic of ongoing debate.
Developed by OpenAI, this AI model processes and generates human-like text based on input prompts.
While it excels in providing 'accurate information' on various subjects, its limitations include potential biases and inaccuracies due to training data quality issues or lack of domain-specific knowledge.
According to a study by MIT researchers, ChatGPT's responses are often correct but may not always be comprehensive.
Moreover, the model's ability to understand context and nuances can be limited.
There are also serious questions of ethics and fair use. Wikipedia has an army of over 49 million human editors who ensure accuracy across 64 million articles worldwide. In contrast, it remains infamously unknown what exactly the large language models supporting ChatGPT were trained on — but it more than likely contains data pulled straight from Wikipedia, which OpenAI is now profiting off.
The discussion highlights just how ubiquitous ChatGPT and related tech have become in just a few years. It’s helping students write essays, teachers grade papers, summarize data for office workers, and sending clueless hikers astray. But at what cost are we ditching carefully reviewed Wikipedia articles in favor of often misleading or sycophantic chatbots?
The problem of hallucinations is only getting worse as AI chatbots become more advanced. Companies’ efforts to nudge their chatbots’ outputs in the right direction have also resulted in mayhem and confusion. The subject of carefully reviewed information and its reliability is more pertinent than ever in a world filled with disinformation and AI slop.
In light of this, it’s essential to consider the implications of relying on AI-powered tools for information. While ChatGPT may be reaching more people than ever before, its reliance on potentially biased training data raises significant concerns about accuracy and reliability. As we move forward in this rapidly evolving digital landscape, it’s crucial to prioritize carefully reviewed sources like Wikipedia and critically evaluate the information we consume online.
The recent surge in popularity of ChatGPT has also raised questions about the ownership and dissemination of knowledge. With companies profiting off large language models that likely contain data pulled straight from Wikipedia, there’s a growing concern about the ethics of this practice.
In a statement to ‘Futurism‘, a spokesperson for the Wikimedia Foundation noted that the organization hadn’t noticed any significant drops in traffic on Wikimedia websites since early 2021. However, data from GWI and Similarweb suggests that ChatGPT usage has rapidly outpaced Wikipedia’s traffic.
Web traffic estimator Similarweb appears to corroborate GWI‘s data. Wikipedia is currently ranked number ten globally in terms of traffic compared to all other sites, while ChatGPT is currently ranked number six with just over 4.5 billion monthly visits.
The rise of ChatGPT and related tech has also led to a shift in the way people seek out information online. With search engines adding more ‘zero-click’ answers, users are increasingly relying on AI-powered tools for information.
‘I think the long-term downward trend for Wikipedia has largely come from search engines adding more ‘zero-click’ answers,’ GWI senior data journalist Chris Beer told ‘Futurism’. ‘Whereas before they might return a Wikipedia page as the top result, now you’re more likely to see a weather forecast, or a famous person’s height, or whatever it may be, within Google itself.’
Google’s AI features, along with ChatGPT, are likely compounding this pre-existing trend.
As we move forward in this rapidly evolving digital landscape, it’s essential to prioritize carefully reviewed sources like Wikipedia and critically evaluate the information we consume online. The implications of relying on AI-powered tools for information are significant, and it’s crucial that we take a step back to consider the reliability and accuracy of these sources.
- futurism.com | Terrifying Survey Claims ChatGPT Has Overtaken Wikipedia
