# Note for using AI **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Tags:** ai\ **Created:** [February 3, 2025, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/note-for-using-ai/1013794 "2025-02-03T00:17:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/note-for-using-ai/1013794/41 "2025-02-03T20:32:03Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > You may not know this, but there are many, many wiki sites everywhere. Yeah, I’m aware of that - just wasn’t clear whether you meant Wikipedia or wikis in general. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/note-for-using-ai/1013794/42 "2025-02-03T20:35:12Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > That’s why it drives me nuts when people use “wiki” as an abbreviation for Wikipedia, that’s like using the word “car” as an abbreviation A little off-topic, but there is a way to disambiguate with “wiki.” If it’s given without an article (“I looked it up on Wiki”) it’s a shortened form of Wikipedia. As “a wiki” (or perhaps “the wiki on [something]” then it’s clear it’s being used in the more general wiki sense. (Of course, though you used “a wiki,” there was still confusion, though to me it was clear.) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/note-for-using-ai/1013794/43 "2025-02-03T20:50:07Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > You click on them and go to the source and verify. That’s why I wrote “go to the source.” AI cannot be completely relied upon—on that I agree. Nor can Wiki, nor can most books, nor most experts. It all depends on what you want, how reliable of an answer you want/need. And- how accurate. For example- in a thread about say eating chocolate, and you want to know- "what is the population of the USA? Ai is just fine. Let us say the thread is about how the USA compares in population to other nations- get Wikipedia for a more precise answer. If the answer is population dynamics in the USA- emigration and immigration, birth rate etc, and how it compare- wiki maybe for the bare numbers, but a solid peer reviewed article on _why_ is needed. In the case of a recipe? Why not AI? But for medical advice? Nope. > [@pulykamell](#): > > It’s similar to what I do when I’m trying to use Wikipedia. Instead of Wikipedia as a cite (which I actually do find mostly reliable these days), I would dig deeper to get something more traceable, at least. AI is less reliable thus far than Wikipedia, so I’d especially check on it for factual questions if using it as an answer. Yep. > [@Maserschmidt](#): > > On the flip side, people do ask Google-able answers here, and I think part of that is wanting the connection of conversation. I And there is nothing wrong with that. But in the past when someone asked a question that could be Googled, some posters used to reply with thing that showed how to use Google- that was indeed a jerkish reply. > [@Atamasama](#): > > I don’t see a huge difference between posting an AI answer and posting an answer from a Google search. In both cases, you have asked a computer a question, and got an answer. AI can be wrong. Someone had some question about something Jewish, but AI brought up the Chabad-Lubavitch answer. Which is often wrong for mainstream judaism. > [@Mangetout](#): > > If by wiki you mean Wikipedia, I think it’s just time people stopped repeating the tired meme about how unreliable it supposedly is. It’s not something you should cite directly in an academic paper, but it’s very reliable for everyday information. Correct- unless it is something where there is a lot of opinions and discussion for different sides going on. Wikipedia editors are human, they have bias. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/note-for-using-ai/1013794.md?page=2)