Laughing Hyena
  • Home
  • Hyena Games
  • Esports
  • NFT Gaming
  • Crypto Trends
  • Game Reviews
  • Game Updates
  • GameFi Guides
  • Shop
Tag:

Wikipedia

Wikipedia Is The Latest Site To Join The Daily Gaming Craze
Game Updates

Wikipedia Is The Latest Site To Join The Daily Gaming Craze

by admin June 20, 2025


Newspapers have offered puzzles in some capacity for as long as anyone can remember, with crosswords being the most renowned. But when The New York Times bought Wordle at the start of 2022, things shifted up a gear. Only earlier this week, The Atlantic magazine announced it was launching daily challenges, and yesterday when I opened Wikipedia on my phone, it suggested I might want to take part in a game.

Disney+ Pulls The Abyss Over Controversial Rat Scene — Again

And it’s a great game! Called Which Came First, it’s a slick, simple and extremely informative quiz that fully embraces the wonder of Wikipedia. But how did we get here?

Obviously, when a newspaper’s website offers such free puzzles, they exist not as some sort of altruistic form of entertainment for the masses, but as a way of harvesting your data and luring you in to their paid ecosystems. The NYT’s purchase of free web game Wordle was seen as utterly bizarre on its surprise announcement, and was inevitably followed by crappy changes and spiteful legal action, but in hindsight it was an extraordinarily canny decision. Since then, the newspaper has built a suite of daily puzzles (not all of them exactly its own ideas), with players encouraged to register accounts and indeed take out subscriptions.

It’s hard to remember just how big of a deal Wordle had become by the end of 2021, providing a much-needed daily distraction and reason to text your friends to a populace that was locked down again and facing the monstrous Omicron variant of covid. A squillion variants were born, and everyone had their little collection of Wordle clones and riffs on the concept that they’d play through each day. Other companies followed the NYT in buying the more popular versions, and the present-day result is that it’s quite normal to find your preferred news website offering a smattering of distracting puzzles, with more joining all the time.

As I mentioned, for those centrists who can’t get enough mealy-mouthed apologetics for the extremism of the right, The Atlantic announced this week it was adding a new section for what it places its spectacles on the tip of its nose and calls “Challenges. Curiosities.” These are five games, two of which are crosswords that have been running for years, one is a bought-in game called Bracket City, and two are brand new, called Stacks and Fluxis. They’re all word games, presumably launching now to try to keep some momentum after the magazine lucked out in March of this year by having its editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, added to a group chat in which the still-in-his-job Pete Hegseth was sharing top-secret attack plans.

Image: The Atlantic

Now it seems that online encyclopedia (and one of humanity’s most extraordinary achievements) Wikipedia is getting in on the action. Yesterday, when having coffee with a friend, I opened the app to try to remember what it was that the director of the extraordinary sci-fi film Primer had done that meant he wouldn’t be working again. (Accrued repeated accusations of domestic violence, if you’re wondering.) But before I could, I was asked by Wikipedia if I would like to play a game. Um, sure! So my chum and I were entirely sidetracked into playing Which Came First, an incredibly simple concept in which the app gives two short descriptions of historical events, plus sometimes a small picture clue, and asks you which happened first. That’s it. It’s great!

Which came first?

Deputies of the French Third Estate take the Tennis Court Oath.

The U.S. vessel SS Savannah arrives at Liverpool, United Kingdom. It is the first steam-propelled vessel to cross the Atlantic, although most of the journey is made under sail.

That’s the first question of today’s edition. I haven’t the faintest idea! I didn’t have a clue about any of the five questions yesterday, either. My historical knowledge is, without question, atrocious. Thankfully, Paul’s a far more rounded, smarter man than me, and was able to make educated or even informed guesses, and “we” got four out of five! Woo!

OK, so obviously this isn’t the most groundbreaking of puzzle ideas. But actually, it’s a perfect addition to Wikipedia, because it’s entirely about finding out something new. I may be sitting here wondering literally which century we’re in with that above question, but I’m also dying to know more about the “Tennis Court Oath” now! It’s also wild to realize that the United States Congress adopted the Great Seal around the same era King Louis XVI was trying to flee the French Revolution. I mean, you may say “Duh,” and deeply worry about the standard of British education in the ‘80s and ‘90s, and you’d likely be right to. If my dad were alive to hear my ignorance, he’d be immediately dead again. But, and this is a lifelong philosophy of mine, you never mock someone for not knowing something if they’re willing to learn it now.

And, with respect to that, Wikipedia’s little game offers direct routes toward some knowledge. At the end of the five questions you’re given your score and streak as you’d expect, but also a nicely presented list of all the articles relevant to the questions you were asked, and indeed dictionary definitions for specific words and terms. Today’s has an excellent 34 boxes to click on for more information, as general as “The Holocaust” and as specific as “Kazimierz Piechowski.” And indeed, I’m pleased to say, a tile for the Tennis Court Oath.

Image: Wikimedia Foundation / Kotaku

When trying to find out more information about Wikipedia’s game, not least whether I’m embarrassingly late to discovering it or one of the first to be offered it, I find there’s the weirdest lack of information out there. When I Googled the term “wikipedia games ‘which came first’,” the second result was, inexplicably, the Wikipedia page for explosive Pokémon Voltorb. The first is a two-month-old Reddit post asking if a German version of the game from two months ago can be played in English, and no one having a clue.

It’s not included in the current list of semi-official “games” created by Wikipedians, and everyone involved seems to be very shy about it all. In fact, the game’s own “more info” link goes to an empty page! (I have, of course, reached out to Wikipedia to ask all about it.) However, I have discovered that it began on May 20, 2025, because that’s how far back the archive of daily games goes. So a month today! Hopefully you can now find it yourself by opening the updated version of the Wikipedia app on your phone. And hopefully it’ll catch on and become a whole section within the app.

.



Source link

June 20, 2025 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Will Shanklin
Product Reviews

Wikipedia cancels plan to test AI summaries after editors skewer the idea

by admin June 16, 2025


Wikipedia is backing off a plan to test AI article summaries. Earlier this month, the platform announced plans to trial the feature for about 10 percent of mobile web visitors. To say they weren’t well-received by editors would be an understatement. The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) then changed plans and cancelled the test.

The AI summaries would have appeared at the top of articles for 10 percent of mobile users. Readers would have had to opt in to see them. The AI-generated summaries only appeared “on a set of articles” for the two-week trial period.

Editor comments in the WMF’s announcement (via 404 Media) ranged from “Yuck” to “Grinning with horror.” One editor wrote, “Just because Google has rolled out its AI summaries doesn’t mean we need to one-up them. I sincerely beg you not to test this, on mobile or anywhere else. This would do immediate and irreversible harm to our readers and to our reputation as a decently trustworthy and serious source.”

“Wikipedia has in some ways become a byword for sober boringness, which is excellent,” the editor continued. “Let’s not insult our readers’ intelligence and join the stampede to roll out flashy AI summaries.”

This screenshot from 404 Media shows another version of an AI-generated summary on a Wikipedia page. The planned test would have only showed up on the mobile web version of the site. (Wikimedia Foundation)

Editors’ gripes weren’t limited to the idea. They also criticized the nonprofit for excluding them from the planning phase. “You also say this has been ‘discussed,’ which is thoroughly laughable as the ‘discussion’ you link to has exactly one participant, the original poster, who is another WMF employee,” an editor wrote.

A Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson shared the following statement with Engadget:

“The Wikimedia Foundation has been exploring ways to make Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects more accessible to readers globally. This two-week, opt-in experiment was focused on making complex Wikipedia articles more accessible to people with different reading levels. For the purposes of this experiment, the summaries were generated by an open-weight Aya model by Cohere. It was meant to gauge interest in a feature like this, and to help us think about the right kind of community moderation systems to ensure humans remain central to deciding what information is shown on Wikipedia.

For these experiments, our usual process includes discussing with volunteers (who create and curate all the information on Wikipedia) to make decisions on whether and how to proceed with building features. The discussion around this feature is an example of this process, where we built out a prototype of an idea and reached out to the Wikipedia volunteer community for their thoughts.

It is common to receive a variety of feedback from volunteers, and we incorporate it in our decisions, and sometimes change course. We welcome such thoughtful feedback — this is what continues to make Wikipedia a truly collaborative platform of human knowledge.

As shared in our latest post on the community discussion page, we do not have any plans to continue the experiment at the moment, as we continue to assess and discuss the feedback we have already received from volunteers.”In the “discussion” page, the organization explained that it wanted to cater to its audience’s needs. “Many readers need some simplified text in addition to the main content,” a WMF employee wrote. “In previous research, we heard that readers wanted to have an option to get a quick overview of a topic prior to jumping into reading the full article.”

The organization didn’t rule out future uses of AI. But they said editors won’t be left in the dark next time. “Bringing generative AI into the Wikipedia reading experience is a serious set of decisions, with important implications, and we intend to treat it as such,” the spokesperson told 404 Media. “We do not have any plans for bringing a summary feature to the wikis without editor involvement.”

Update, June 13, 2025, 12:52PM ET: This story has been corrected to note that Wikipedia never actually started its AI summary test. The plan was announced, but cancelled before it took place. A statement from the Wikimedia Foundation has also been added, and the headline has been updated as well.



Source link

June 16, 2025 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Wikipedia Won't Add AI Slop To Pages After Editors Fight Back
Game Reviews

Wikipedia Won’t Add AI Slop To Pages After Editors Fight Back

by admin June 11, 2025


The Wikimedia Foundation, a nonprofit group that hosts, develops, and controls Wikipedia, has announced that it won’t be moving forward with plans to add AI-generated summaries to articles after it received an overwhelmingly negative reaction from its army of dedicated (and unpaid) human editors.

Ironheart’s New Trailer Delivers A Couple Cool Surprises

As first reported by 404Media, Wikimedia quietly announced plans to test out AI-generated summaries on the popular and free online encyclopedia, which has become an important and popular bastion of knowledge and information on the modern internet. In a page posted on June 2 in the backrooms of Wikipedia titled “Simple Article Summaries,” a Wikimedia rep explained that after discussions about AI at a recent 2024 Wiki conference, the nonprofit group was going to try a two-week test of machine-generated summaries. These summaries would be located at the top of the page and would be marked as unverified.

Wikimedia intended to start offering these summaries to a small subset of mobile users starting on June 2. The plan to add AI-generated content to the top of pages received an extremely negative reaction from editors in the comments below the announcement.

The first replies from two different editors was a simple “Yuck.”

Another followed up with: “Just because Google has rolled out its AI summaries doesn’t mean we need to one-up them. I sincerely beg you not to test this, on mobile or anywhere else. This would do immediate and irreversible harm to our readers and to our reputation as a decently trustworthy and serious source.”

“Nope,” said another editor. “I don’t want an additional floating window of content for editors to argue over. Not helpful or better than a simple article lead.”

A day later, after many, many editors continued to respond negatively to the idea, Wikimedia backed down and canceled its plans to add AI-generated summaries. Editors are the lifeblood of the platform, and if too many of them get mad and leave, entire sections of Wikipedia would rot and fail quickly, likely leading to the slow death of the site.

“The Wikimedia Foundation has been exploring ways to make Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects more accessible to readers globally,” a Wikimedia Foundation rep told 404Media. “This two-week, opt-in experiment was focused on making complex Wikipedia articles more accessible to people with different reading levels. For the purposes of this experiment, the summaries were generated by an open-weight Aya model by Cohere. It was meant to gauge interest in a feature like this, and to help us think about the right kind of community moderation systems to ensure humans remain central to deciding what information is shown on Wikipedia.”

“It is common to receive a variety of feedback from volunteers, and we incorporate it in our decisions, and sometimes change course. We welcome such thoughtful feedback — this is what continues to make Wikipedia a truly collaborative platform of human knowledge.”

In other words: We didn’t give anyone a heads up about our dumb AI plans and got yelled at by a bunch of people online for 24 hours, and we won’t be doing the bad thing anymore.

Wikipedia editors have been fighting the good fight against AI slop flooding what has quickly become one of the last places on the internet to not be covered in ads, filled with junk, or locked behind an excessively expensive paywall. It is a place that contains billions of words written by dedicated humans around the globe. It’s a beautiful thing. And if Wikimedia Foundation ever fucks that up with crappy AI-generated garbage, it will be the modern digital equivalent of the Library of Alexandria burning to the ground. So yeah, let’s not do that, okay?

.



Source link

June 11, 2025 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Categories

  • Crypto Trends (929)
  • Esports (706)
  • Game Reviews (657)
  • Game Updates (822)
  • GameFi Guides (922)
  • Gaming Gear (885)
  • NFT Gaming (905)
  • Product Reviews (875)
  • Uncategorized (1)

Recent Posts

  • Trader Goes From $43M To $770,000 As Ethereum Price Retraces, Here’s How
  • Kinsta review | TechRadar
  • No, Silksong hasn’t been in development hell, hype skyrocketed sales of the original game to give Team Cherry financial freedom
  • Winklevoss-backed Gemini gets EU-wide pass through Malta’s MiCA nod
  • U.S. Justice Department Official Says Writing Code Without Bad Intent ‘Not a Crime’

Recent Posts

  • Trader Goes From $43M To $770,000 As Ethereum Price Retraces, Here’s How

    August 21, 2025
  • Kinsta review | TechRadar

    August 21, 2025
  • No, Silksong hasn’t been in development hell, hype skyrocketed sales of the original game to give Team Cherry financial freedom

    August 21, 2025
  • Winklevoss-backed Gemini gets EU-wide pass through Malta’s MiCA nod

    August 21, 2025
  • U.S. Justice Department Official Says Writing Code Without Bad Intent ‘Not a Crime’

    August 21, 2025

Newsletter

Subscribe my Newsletter for new blog posts, tips & new photos. Let's stay updated!

About me

Welcome to Laughinghyena.io, your ultimate destination for the latest in blockchain gaming and gaming products. We’re passionate about the future of gaming, where decentralized technology empowers players to own, trade, and thrive in virtual worlds.

Recent Posts

  • Trader Goes From $43M To $770,000 As Ethereum Price Retraces, Here’s How

    August 21, 2025
  • Kinsta review | TechRadar

    August 21, 2025

Newsletter

Subscribe my Newsletter for new blog posts, tips & new photos. Let's stay updated!

@2025 laughinghyena- All Right Reserved. Designed and Developed by Pro


Back To Top
Laughing Hyena
  • Home
  • Hyena Games
  • Esports
  • NFT Gaming
  • Crypto Trends
  • Game Reviews
  • Game Updates
  • GameFi Guides
  • Shop

Shopping Cart

Close

No products in the cart.

Close