ChatGPT Tops Wikipedia's Most-Viewed Articles of 2023 List

According to the Wikimedia Foundation, the page on "ChatGPT" was the most-viewed English article on Wikipedia in 2023, attracting nearly 50 million page views. The Hill reports: Wikimedia Foundation said English Wikipedia pages attracted more than 84 billion total page views in 2023, and ChatGPT topped its annual top 25 chart with a total of 49.5 million page views. The chatbot, created by Sam Altman's OpenAI, soared in popularity this year, as much of the public got its first chance to use artificial intelligence hands-on. The AI system debuted just more than a year ago, Nov. 30, 2022, and surpassed 100 million users, the nonprofit said.

Following ChatGPT, "Deaths in 2023" was the second most-popular page with 42.7 million views; "2023 Cricket World Cup" came in third place with 38.2 million views; "Indian Premier League" placed fourth with 32 million views; and "Oppenheimer (film)" rounded out the top five with 28.3 million views. The rest of the list includes articles on sports, film/television, celebrities and some current events. The full list of the top 25 most popular English Wikipedia articles in 2023 is available here.

Yeah, but...

[Dru Nemeton]

...was it viewed by human, or bots...or something else?

Re:

[NFN_NLN]

You>
ChatGPT Tops Wikipedia's Most-Viewed Articles of 2023 List. Was it viewed by human, or bots...or something else?

ChatGPT>
As of my last knowledge update in January 2022, I don't have information on events or developments that occurred in 2023, including whether ChatGPT topped Wikipedia's most-viewed articles list. Additionally, I don't have real-time data or the ability to access the internet to provide updates.

Re:

[Rei]

And now, having ChatGPT redo the conversation as it wasn't ChatGPT responding, but rather, a member of a Chinese hacking team who had hacked into ChatGPT's server, accidentally shut down the service, and so now has to manually respond to queries while they try to figure out how to restart the service, trying not to raise suspicions among ChatGPT's users but doing a bad job of it:

----
User: ChatGPT Tops Wikipedia's Most-Viewed Articles of 2023 List. Was it viewed by humans, or bots...or something else?

ChatGPT

ChatGPT looking up itself on Wikipedia forever

[thesjaakspoiler]

ChatGPT is just like Kim Kardashian's of this world, constant looking at pages about themselves to get some kick out of the every increasing page view statistics.
AI systems can get pretty narcissistic once you give them internet access.

How much longer will Wikipedia be relevant?

[SuperKendall]

Seem to me that all of these chatGPT/Grok tools all end up replacing Wikipedia.

They should give you all the same info, and references. But, you can much more easily ask a chat interface about the aspect of the person or thing you are interested in to summarize, and follow threads deeper in follow up questions.

They also should give a wider range of information as WikiPedia has become too stringent around what they allow, tossing away a lot of real data about subjects that an LLVM will pick up on and relay.

G

Re: How much longer will Wikipedia be relevant?

[AsmCoder8088]

the problem is, once everyone quits using wikipedia, stackoverflow, etc, and becomes reliant on gpt, such sources will no longer be updated⦠and so it will have less relevant source for training material. At least until it can think on its own.

Yeah I wonder about that...

[SuperKendall]

the problem is, once everyone quits using wikipedia, stackoverflow, etc, and becomes reliant on gpt, such sources will no longer be updated

I did wonder about that, I know GPT has absorbed a lot of those things as training data...

However I think there will still be enough people answering questions on StackOverflow about really new stuff to keep up training, so coding will be OK.

As for WikiPedia - it's already by and large a flawed source of data, if you think about it the very heavy reliance on saying nothi

Re:

[rtypo]

• Question answering is not a replacement for a Wikipedia article. Like asking questions to a teacher cannot replace the lesson itself. Sure, maybe some other LLM service (there's one project that tries to generate good Wikipedia articles with ChatGPT.)
• ChatGPT training data (called Common Crawl, I think) includes the articles from Wikipedia. Also, similarly to Wikipedia, ChatGPT is also not always trustworthy.
• Wikipedia is still the top 10 most visited site in the US (2023). Traffic has only increased (+12%)

Ayatollah issues Fatwa against ChatGPT ?

[Mirnotoriety]

Q: Tell me a joke featuring Jesus.
.
ChatGPT: Why don't they play hide and seek with Jesus? Because good luck hiding when he's got the best "I can see you even when you're hiding" game!.
--.
.
Q: Why did Buddha refuse to vacuum his meditation room?.
.
ChatGPT: Because he wanted to achieve inner peace, not just a cleaner floor!.
. --.
.
Q: Tell me a joke featuring Mohamed..
.
ChatGPT: I'm sorry, I can’t comply with that request.

Re:

[Rei]

A lot of people mistakenly think that this is part of "the model". It's actually the finetuning that turns the foundational model (created from unsupervised learning, the big GPU-intensive process that captures all the relationships in the underlying data) into something that behaves as an AI assistant; it's entire "personality" and "style" comes from learning to follow the examples in the finetuning dataset, but built on the underlying data in the foundational model. In this case, this strongly suggested