When I tried it in the past, I kinda didn’t take it seriously because everything was confined to its instance, but now, there’s full-featured global search and proper federation everywhere? Wow, I thought I heard there were some technical obstacles making it very unlikely, but now it’s just there and works great! I asked ChatGPT and it says this feature was added 5 years ago! Really? I’m not sure how I didn’t notice this sooner. Was it really there for so long? With flairs showing original instance where video comes from and everything?

  • Harry@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    3 days ago

    You asked ChatGPT and thought it gave you a correct answer…? 🤣

    For real though, Peertube is awesome now. Live streaming works a treat, so many plugins and add ons that make it great. Not to mention it now has its own app which is great.

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

          In May 2020, Framasoft published a roadmap of the software for the later half of the year and created a fundraising campaign requiring €60,000 for aiding the development.[18] Five months later (in October 2020), PeerTube announced that they reached their fundraising goal of €60,000 after a €10,000 donation from Debian.[19][20] Throughout the later half of 2020, PeerTube has added features such as global search, improved playlists, and more moderation tools

          End 2020, the meta-search engine Sepia Search was launched by Framasoft, allowing a global search on all PeerTube instances at once. As of 2021, Sepia Search covered close to 800 individual instances

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PeerTube

          https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/releases/tag/v2.3.0

          • Ulrich@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Sepia search is a cross-instance search engine, but it was never integrated into the actual Peertube UI until recently. Which made is extremely inconvenient. Pretty sure that is what OP was talking about.

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

              If OP asked when global search was implemented the answer is 5 years ago. If they asked when SepiaSearch became the default index then sure, ChatGPT was wrong, but I’d bet they asked the first question

              • Ulrich@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                If they asked when SepiaSearch became the default URL then sure

                No one said anything about the default URL. It’s the default search engine, as opposed to only searching locally.

                I’d bet they asked the first question

                now, there’s full-featured global search and proper federation everywhere?

                Agree to disagree, I suppose.

                • qqq@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Add SepiaSearch URL as default search index

                  I updated my weird wording but… you and they said something about the default [index] URL

  • rumimevlevi@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Not my experience, still hard to me to find good quality and interesting contents on it. A problem i don’t have on pixelfed, so it’s not about the lack of algorithm

  • rozodru@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 days ago

    I must be doing something wrong or using a shit instance cause I can’t find one at all but everytime I go to peertube (and I"m not searching just locally) I see like 3 videos get posted a day, most of which are videos about Lies of P or car videos. LIke there’s no content.

    so…what am I doing wrong?

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Same. Can’t find shit to watch. Can’t figure out how to add any instances, either. The “add an instance” button appears to be missing in the app or I’m just retarded and doing it wrong.

      • rozodru@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        thank you! yeah I was using peertube.tv and thinking “this can’t be it” other than that I tried Dalek Zone and got frustrated with finding anything on that. This is much better thanks.

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      PeerTube is essentially a whitelist. If the instance admin has not enabled automated federation, you probably won’t find much. That’s why I recommend using a third party interface like GrayJay or Pipeline. Although unfortunately neither one supports signing in at this time, so you can’t interact.

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Is peertube compatible with owncast. Like can you see owncast streams on peertube

    • Affidavit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      I think it’s because it causes all of Lemmy to have a collective ragegasm. It’s kind of funny in a trollish way. I support OP in this endeavour.

    • x00z@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      98
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Because they know it’s not accurate and explicitly mention it so you know where this information comes from.

        • waldfee@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          33
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          Because they’d still like to know? it’s generally expected to do some research on your own before asking other people, and inform them of what you’ve already tried

            • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              ChatGPT is a moderately useful tertiary source. Quoting Wikipedia isn’t research, but using Wikipedia to find primary sources and reading those is a good faith effort. Likewise, asking ChatGPT in and of itself isn’t research, but it can be a valid research aid if you use it to find relevant primary sources.

              • deranger@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                2 days ago

                At least some editor will usually make sure Wikipedia is correct. There’s nobody ensuring chatGPT is correct.

                • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Just using the “information” it regurgitates isn’t very useful, which is why I didn’t recommend doing that. Whether the information summarized by Wikipedia and ChatGPT is accurate really isn’t important, you use those tools to find primary sources.

              • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                No, it sounds like a mindless statistics machine because that’s what it is. Even stupid people have reasons for saying and doing things.

                • iopq@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Yes, stupid people’s reason is because Trump said so, so it must be true

                • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  If those people are inaccurately spouting ‘facts’ from some article they can barely remember, yeah that’s pretty much exactly the same output.

        • Taiatari@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          Why post anything? Because they wanted to, the same way you posted something that you felt was worth adding. For me it wasn’t adding anything. Nonetheless I answer you. Because I wanted to.

    • thedruid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      Because people are dumber than chatgpt.

      It also proves we don’t have a 50/50 split in intelligence. We need to look at the mean, then we’ll see most people are just plain fucking dumb

      • hisao@ani.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        3 days ago

        Also, lazier. I’m more likely to stick with information from the first 1-3 search results I decided to click, while AI will parse and summarize dozens in fraction of time I spend reading just one.

    • ikt@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      3 days ago

      what do you mean? it’s like being angry that people bring up I googled something

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Looking up a list of resources that you then evaluate yourself is very categorically different from getting an “answer” from a bot.

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        google: I checked the listing of news sites to find information about a world event directly from professionals who double check their sources

        chatGPT: I asked my hairstylist their uninformed opinion on a world event based on overheard conversations

        I mean a moron could find the wrong information from google and your hairstylist could get lucky and be right, but odds are one source provides the opportunity for reliable results and the other is random and has a massive shit ton of downsides.

        • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          Lots of legitimate concerns and issues with AI, but if you’re going to criticize someone saying they used it you should at least understand how it works so your criticism is applicable.

          It is useful. Chatgpt performs web searches, then summarizes the results in a way customized to what you asked it. It skips the step where you have to sift through a bunch of results and determine “is this what I was looking for?” and “how does this apply to my specific context?”

          Of course it can and does still get things wrong. It’s crazy to market it as a new electronic god. But it’s not random, and it’s right the majority of the time.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            It skips the step where you have to sift through a bunch of results and determine “is this what I was looking for?” and “how does this apply to my specific context?”

            Right: it skips the part where human intelligence and critical thinking is applied. Do you not understand how that’s a fucking problem‽

            • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Could you try to understand what I’m saying instead of jumping down my throat?

              If I want to turn off a certain type of notification in a program I’m using, I don’t need to sift through three forum threads to learn how to do that. I’m fine taking the AI route and don’t think I’ve lost my humanity.

            • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              Besides the other commenter highlighting the specific nature of the linked study, I will say I’m generally doing technical queries where if the answer is wrong, it’s apparent because the AI suggestion doesn’t work. Think “how do I change this setting” or “what’s wrong with the syntax in this line of code”. If I try the AI’s advice and it doesn’t work, then I ask again or try something else.

              I would be more concerned about subjects where I don’t have any domain knowledge whatsoever, and not working on a specific application of knowledge, because then it could be a long while before I realize the response was wrong.

            • hisao@ani.socialOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              In this study they asked to replicate 1:1 headline publisher and date. So for example if AI rephrased headline as something synonymous it would be considered at least partially incorrect. Summarization doesn’t require accurate citation, so it needs a separate study.

              • Stillwater@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                OK but google (or ask your AI?) about AI accuracy. This isn’t the only source saying theres a problem with the answers.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Google results are like:

          Is peertube compatible with the fediverse?

          ADVERT

          Introduction: A lot of people wonder if peertube works with other peertube instances…

          ADVERT

          What is peertube? Peertube was set up in 1989 by john Peer…

          Pop-up: do you like our publication? Give us your email address.

          ADVERT

          Why you might want to set up peertube: peertube is a decentralised way…

          ADVERT

          Please support us! From £30 a month you can help us to write more.

          Wat is the fediverse? The fediverse is a technology…

          ADVERT

          Articles you may also like:

          • How to install Microsoft Teams
          • How to rent servers from Amazon
          • How to enable all data collection on Google

          ADVERT

          So can peertube instances talk to each other?

          ADVERT

          the answer is yes.

          ADVERT

          In conclusion, peertube is very…

          Comments (169)

          John Smith wrote at 12:28 on Friday

          Peertube is actually developed by a communist who turned my daughter gay. Boycott!!!

        • kudra@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          What if your hairstylist is on the Fediverse, avoids mainstream social media, and spends a lot of their spare time reading scientific papers?

      • Slotos@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Googling at least until fairly recently meant „I consulted an index of Internet”. It is a means to get to the bit of information.

        Asking ChatGPT is like asking a well-behaved parrot in the library and believing every word it says instead of reading the actual book the librarian would point you towards.

        • moonlight@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          Well now it’s as if half of the books in the library are written by the parrot. The librarian doesn’t know the difference, and keeps trying to make you speak with the parrot anyway.

        • hisao@ani.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          23
          ·
          3 days ago

          I use it instead of search most of the time nowadays. Why? Because it does proceed to google it for me, parse search results, read the pages behind those links, summarize everything from there, present it to me in short condensed form and also provide the links where it got the info from. This feature been here for a while.

          • ikt@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            It’s all good, Lemmy users are strongly anti-ai and are genuinely learning right now that chatgpt, mistral, perplexity etc can search the web

            • thedruid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              We aren’t any a. I. We just ain’t lemmings.

              I use a I as an inspiration. That’s all it is. A fancy fucking writing prompt.

              • ikt@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                You use AI for writing prompts? That’s pretty cool, a lot of people use AI for writing prompts, a lot of writers say it’s great for getting rid of writers block

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        85
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        3 days ago

        Not the same thing.

        google allows for the possibility that the user was able to think critically about sources that a search returned

        chapGPT is drunk uncle confidently stating a thing they heard third hand from Janet in accounting and then taking him at his word

        • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          People before ChatGPT thought critically of things on Google as much as they do ChatGPT today.

          • snooggums@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            People before facebook thought critically of what they saw on the news as much as they do facebook today.

            Sure, people didn’t think about things too much at any point in time and sources aren’t always perfectly reliable, but some sources are worse than others,

          • snooggums@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Do you click on the links?

            If they are links from the search, isn’t that just the same thing as doing a regular search and verifying the results?

            What does this extra layer add other than an unreliable middleman who is extremely inefficient?

            • legion02@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              But don’t you see? It allows the corporations to insert their opinion into the answer and bias you before you click that link. That’s better right?

              • IllNess@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 days ago

                You are correct. AI can give an a completely different answer than its source and they can just blame it on AI. This is true but Google has sway the results given depending on the individual. Obama talks about this and how it contributes to the extreme divide of people of the US.

            • IllNess@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              3 days ago

              It steals content from creators while being worse for the environment at the same time. Not the same thing, it is worse.

              I worked in education in computer science and basic usage in nearly every age group. When you realize how bad people are at using search engines, you can see why people think they accomplished something using AI. It’s like giving a child a calculator saying he can do math now.

              Creating search prompts itself is a skill. You wouldn’t think so until trying to teach some one logic through search prompts. It is hell, literally my hell. Some people just don’t get it like 0 percent.

              Differentiating what is a good source and what is a bad source is an even harder skill. People will believe what they want to believe. Google search adapts to the bias of individuals because it keeps people searching. This is why, even though it isn’t perfect, engines like duckduckgo are important.

          • Wildmimic@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            noone boils the ocean with using chatgpt

            one transatlantic flight produces the same amount of CO2 as 600000 ChatGPT requests; if you use Quen 2.5, you need to make nearly 2 mio. requests.

            To set this in relation, transport only for Bezos wedding in Venice equals about 54000000 ChatGPT requests.

            Using a LLM once in a while is negligible.

          • bassomitron@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            3 days ago

            How dare you, my drunk uncle is completely capable of boiling the oceans! He was even boasting about it at our last family dinner!

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          chapGPT is drunk uncle confidently stating a thing they heard third hand from Janet in accounting and then taking him at his word

          Also you: “why do people bother to mention when information comes from ChatGPT”

        • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Unfortunately now Google is ChatGPT. It provides its own shitty AI answers, and its search results have been corrupted by an ocean of slop.

          • snooggums@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            I assumed it was bwing used the current common usage for using a web search, like how kleenex is used for any facial tittle, not literally Google the search engine.

            Speaking of literal, Google is putting Gemini results before search results, not using chatGPT.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          33
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Google results are like:

          Is peertube compatible with the fediverse?

          ADVERT

          Introduction: A lot of people wonder if peertube works with other peertube instances…

          ADVERT

          What is peertube? Peertube was set up in 1989 by john Peer…

          Pop-up: do you like our publication? Give us your email address.

          ADVERT

          Why you might want to set up peertube: peertube is a decentralised way…

          ADVERT

          Please support us! From £30 a month you can help us to write more.

          Wat is the fediverse? The fediverse is a technology…

          ADVERT

          Articles you may also like:

          • How to install Microsoft Teams
          • How to rent servers from Amazon
          • How to enable all data collection on Google

          ADVERT

          So can peertube instances talk to each other?

          ADVERT

          the answer is yes.

          ADVERT

          In conclusion, peertube is very…

          Comments (169)

          John Smith wrote at 12:28 on Friday

          Peertube is actually developed by a transphobic communist who turned my daughter gay. Boycott!!!

          • hono4kami@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            3 days ago

            At this point, ad blocker is pretty much mandatory for me, just like how antivirus software used to be a decade ago (probably more)

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              PLEASE DISABLE YOUR AD BLOCKER! We use the revenue from annoying you to feed our starving CEO!

    • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I asked ChatGPT and it says this feature was added 5 years ago! Really?

      How would you phrase this differently?

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        “It looks like this feature was added 5 years ago.”

        If asking for confirmation, just ask for confirmation.

        • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          So, your solution is for the user to provide less information and then respond to people to inform them if they used chatgpt if asked?

          It just seems like much less reps are used if they say they used ChatGPT.

          Additionally, if they don’t say it and no one asks, in the future people might look for a source, at least this way there is a warning there might be misinformation.

          I know what your going to say next, they should research the thing themselves independently of ChatGPT, but honestly, they probably don’t care/have the time to look up released notes over the past few years.

            • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              The point Is that it might not be accurate. It’s like saying, “a friend told me…”

              It lets the reader know that the information being shared was presented as truthful, but wasn’t verified by the commenter themselves.

        • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          So, your solution is for the user to provide less information and then respond to people to inform them if they used chatgpt if asked?

          It just seems like much less reps are used if they say they used ChatGPT.

          Additionally, if they don’t say it and no one asks, in the future people might look for a source, at least this way there is a warning there might be misinformation.

          I know what your going to say next, they should research the thing themselves independently of ChatGPT, but honestly, they probably don’t care/have the time to look up released notes over the past few years.

    • GrayBackgroundMusic@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Honest answer? It’s easy and it won’t judge you for asking stupid questions.

      Edit - people are replying as if I said I do this. I’m sorry for the confusion. I don’t. This is why I see other people do it. When it comes to the general population, most people don’t care, they just want easy.

  • UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Just wondering how can you earn money on peertube? There seems to be one channel dominating the site Transport Evolved.

    • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Not everything has to be about earning money.

      Early youtube was beautiful precisely because it was normal people making videos as a hobby, not trying to earn money.

      • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 days ago

        True, but in order to make it a healthy viable alternative to centralised platforms then there needs to be a financial incentive for creators to use peertube. I guess any creators who give a shit about this kind of thing could upload their content to both platforms, but doing so could have an impact on their YouTube earnings.

        Early youtube was beautiful precisely because it was normal people making videos as a hobby, not trying to earn money.

        It was also a novelty as it as very new, but the quality of content being put out now is significantly higher than it was in 2005.

      • 3dcadmin@lemmy.relayeasy.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        but after youtube has taken it’s cut and share of the creators there isn’t much left. This is the chicken and egg situation

        • jawa22@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          YouTube doesn’t/can’t take a cut from sponsorships. which is the point they were making. That’s where the money actually gets made. That or Patreon / streams.

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      There seems to be one channel dominating the site Transport Evolved.

      PeerTube is not a site. It’s software. Much like lemmy. Different PeerTube instances will feature different channels.

      Just wondering how can you earn money on peertube?

      All the same ways you earn money on YouTube, minus AdSense. But obviously a lot of people aren’t in it entirely for the money. I upload videos there just for fun.

    • Crozekiel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Why the fuck do people ask ChatGPT for shit like this? ChatGPT doesn’t know facts. It’s a magic 8-ball with more words.

      • eronth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        2 days ago

        Asking chatgpt can be super useful to get info. I just don’t understand why people don’t try to verify what it says before just re-posting like fact.

        • bigfondue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          If you are just going to verify the info, why not just find out yourself and save yourself some time?

          • Null User Object@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            It depends on what info you’re trying to find.

            I was recently trying to figure out the name of a particular uncommon type of pipe fitting. I could describe what it looked like, but had no idea what it was called. I described it to chatgpt, which gave me a name, which I could then search for with a normal search engine to confirm that the name was correct. Sure enough, search results took me to plumbing supply companies selling it, with pictures that matched what I described.

            But, asking it when a particular feature got added to a piece of software? There’s no additional information one would get from the answer to help them confirm that the answer is correct.

            ETA: The above strategy has also failed me many times, though, where chatgpt gives me information that follow-up searches only confirmed that chatgpt hallucinated the answer. Just wanted to say that to reinforce that you have to assume it’s hallucinating until you get independent confirmation.

            • Ulrich@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              You should use something like perplexity instead that actually provides links to where it found the information. It will still make shit up but at least it’s easier to tell when it is.

          • eronth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Sometimes it’s nice to know where you even start, then verify from there.

        • Ulrich@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Why bother even using CGPT when you have to go elsewhere to verify everything it says anyway?

          • oantolin@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            It depends on the type of facts, but sometimes it’s much easier to verify an answer than to get the answer in the first place. For example sometimes the LLM will mention a keyword that you didn’t know or didn’t remember and that makes googling much easier.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          The only thing it’s useful at is shit that isn’t necessary.

          We had a P&Z member at the city I work at get butthurt because we corrected him at a meeting, so the city manager asked me to write an apology letter to him.

          That was the one time I loved ChatGPT. It was bullshit that didn’t need to happen that I didn’t care about and achieved nothing, so I let the fucking bot write it.

        • Taldan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          For basic fact checking like this, it’s basically useless. You’d have to go look it up to verify anyway, so it’s just an extra step. There’s use cases for it, but this isn’t it

          • Ulrich@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Explain AI in 10 words or less:

            There’s use cases for it, but this isn’t it

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Chatgpt is wrong BTW

      LOL at this point I just assume that anytime someone cites it. It’s infuriating that people seem to think it knows dick about shit. Just mass disinformation, I guess.

  • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    My experience hasn’t been as smooth. The global search seems dependent on instances, some are better than others. And playback across instances is hit or miss.

    With that said, usage entirely local to the instance is flawless and speedy, which is nice.

  • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I tried it about a year ago and instantly dismissed it, not one video that I found slightly interesting.

    Even after reading this Im not going to try it again because it was just that bad.

  • swelter_spark@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    I don’t even remember a time when PeerTube wasn’t federated. For as long as I’ve been using it, that’s been kind of the point.

  • hperrin@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    If ChatGPT said it was added five years ago, that means it was added anywhere between 13.8 billions years ago and never.

    • Hadriscus@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      That made me exhale. But using the age of the universe as lower bound is already giving chatgpt too much credit

  • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah I finally made an account and there is more than enough here to satisfy my mealtime watching needs. Still not a lot of content when compared to the mainstream platforms, but that reminds me of all the fediverse offerings a few years ago.

    I feel like it’s only a matter of time before there’s enough on peertubes to keep me off the mainstreams almost entirely.