This article is within the scope of WikiProject Google, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Google and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GoogleWikipedia:WikiProject GoogleTemplate:WikiProject GoogleGoogle articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Artificial Intelligence, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Artificial intelligence on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Artificial IntelligenceWikipedia:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceTemplate:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceArtificial Intelligence articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Should there be some mention of its diversity issuesedit
Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I'm hesitant to edit to add this since I'm pretty sure it will get reverted but shouldn't there be some sort of mention of refusal to generate images of white males and generating intentionally historically inacurrate images. It has been mentioned by reliable sources like the BBC and New York Post. I think the coverage of it alongside the tweets about it with 100k+ likes should be enough to show that it is relevant to the article. Qwexcxewq (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
It's already at Gemini (chatbot)#Reception. This has to do with the chatbot (the artist formerly known as Bard) specifically, not the language model. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:06, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Regardless of the factual validity of the issue mentioned above (or the balance in the way that it's presented, since from what I could read online, the criticism was as much because of "Black Nazis" as it was due to some "White erasure"), implying that it equates to "racism" is representative of a minority POV that is controversial and not supported by much of the current consensus on racial research, as seen on the Reverse racism page. "Anti-white racism" or "reverse racism" is, in fact, not some widely accepted, self-evident concept, and attempting to introduce it here is, at best, factually dubious, and parroting fringe reactionary propaganda in any case. Hence, I've taken the liberty of removing the "racist" adjective.
Additionally, unlike what the above poster claims, the New York post is, in fact, not a "reliable" source for political matters (as per the perennial sources list) - and obviously, neither Elon Musk nor Jordan Peterson count as such either. 90.92.45.140 (talk) 22:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Any content about this incident does not belong on this article and should be moved to Gemini (chatbot). This is like putting information about the iPhone's camera on the article for iOS. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
All right, thanks for correcting it, and I'm sorry that I didn't do so myself. Even after I read your response above, I somehow didn't pay attention to it - I should've been more conscious of what part of Gemini this actually belonged to. 90.92.45.140 (talk) 14:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}