old profile: /u/antonim@lemmy.world
Yeah, totally makes sense, “they” attacked IA one month in advance before the elections, knowing that IA would spend around a month rewriting and improving their site code until the Save Page option would be enabled again (unless IA themselves are a part of the plot???), so that news articles could be “edited on the fly” (with what result?) until the election day, while other similar web archiving services such as archive.is would keep working just fine.
clbottomt when the chtopt shows up [imagine this as that popular GIF meme]
Thanks. It’s a part of history I know very little about.
I meant the “for over a hundred years” part specifically, I bolded it but it’s not as noticeable as it should be.
the US a terrorist nation for couping democratically elected leader in favour of dictators for over a hundred years
Is this really true?
And that’s more or less what I was aiming for, so we’re back at square one. What you wrote is in line with my first comment:
it is a weak compliment for AI, and more of a criticism of the current web search engines
The point is that there isn’t something that makes AI inherently superior to ordinary search engines. (Personally I haven’t found AI to be superior at all, but that’s a different topic.) The difference in quality is mainly a consequence of some corporate fuckery to wring out more money from the investors and/or advertisers and/or users at the given moment. AI is good (according to you) just because search engines suck.
Germans excused Holocaust by… saying that it would prevent trans genocide?
This is too stupid even for a troll.
Then, you end up finishing the game
I.e. you do win…
AI LLMs simply are better at surfacing it
Ok, but how exactly? Is there some magical emergent property of LLMs that guides them to filter out the garbage from the quality content?
If you don’t feel like discussing this and won’t do anything more than deliberately miss the point, you don’t have to reply to me at all.
they’re a great use in surfacing information that is discussed and available, but might be buried with no SEO behind it to surface it
This is what I’ve seen many people claim. But it is a weak compliment for AI, and more of a criticism of the current web search engines. Why is that information unavailable to search engines, but is available to LLMs? If someone has put in the work to find and feed the quality content to LLMs, why couldn’t that same effort have been invested in Google Search?
Admittedly that sort of censoring has been used online since forever. Stuff like “pr0n”, etc.
Are you a bot? Or just lazy?
I am a bot. Beep boop.
Also, the first woman? Props to her but I’m quite surprised no one else has done that
Yeah, it’s indeed false. I didn’t even research it actively, but Wilson on her Twitter profile mentioned an Italian translator who translated Homer years before Wilson.
(To be sure, I just checked Italian Wikipedia. It was Giovanna Bemporad, her translation was published in 1970.)
deleted by creator
Here in my southeast European shithole I’m not worrying about my tax money, the upgrade is going to be pretty cheap, they’re just going to switch from unlicensed XP to unlicensed Win7.
Yep, but I didn’t mention that because it’s not a part of the “Wayback Machine”, it’s just the general “Internet Archive” business of archiving media, which is for now still completely unavailable. (I’ve uploaded dozens of public-domain books there myself, and I’m really missing it…)
You can (well, could) put in any live URL there and IA would take a snapshot of the current page on your request. They also actively crawl the web and take new snapshots on their own. All of that counts as ‘writing’ to the database.
If you’re thinking of American right-wingers and fascists who are currently celebrating Trump’s victory, I must say their view of the world is so dark, negative and pessimistic, that nobody could really describe it as utopia-like. This is a brief respite for them, nothing more.
If you’re thinking more abstractly, or of some very specific incredibly lucky people, then I guess it could be so.