Most of the time, you don't want to be a Debbie Downer on the current trends.  The pro-freedom side of the political spectrum is currently on a winning streak with President Trump at the helm, and it's becoming more than amusing to say, “Yes, we voted for this.”  However, you also must be clear-eyed about emerging threats on the horizon, and thus, we need to consider the serious issue of the dangerous combination of the incredibly biased Wikipedia and A.I.

It only makes sense to cast a wary eye toward A.I. systems and Wikipedia, and they're teaming up to compound the problem.  This may not matter with most subjects, given that there is some transparency with the latter, but when taken in combination with the always murky A.I. processes and controversial subjects, we have a recipe for disaster.  A recent PragerU video gives a short overview of the dangers involved:

It's vitally important to ask the questions: Can you trust Wikipedia?  Can you trust the A.I. systems that use Wikipedia as a source?  Because this is the source cited in most Google search results and regurgitated by A.I. systems.

As related in the video, 2016 was a watershed moment for the left.  When Donald Trump unexpectedly trounced Hillary Clinton in what was supposed to be her coronation, the left became determined to control the internet, or they would lose again.  Thus, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF)  — Wikipedia's parent organization, under the direction of executive director Katherine Maher — implemented the Wikimedia Movement Strategy.

Anti-liberty leftists made it their mission to remake Wikipedia from an encyclopedia into a social justice platform.  Internal documents that are now public detail a shift toward what the WMF termed “knowledge equity”:

In January 2017, the Wikimedia movement started an ambitious process to find alignment, rebuild trust, and identify a shared strategic direction for the 2030 horizon.

Surprisingly, it worked.

Dozens of groups and organizations have now come together to endorse the Wikimedia movement’s new strategic direction, focused on “Knowledge as a service” and “Knowledge equity”. ...

Knowledge equity: As a social movement, we will focus our efforts on the knowledge and communities that have been left out by structures of power and privilege. We will welcome people from every background to build strong and diverse communities. We will break down the social, political, and technical barriers preventing people from accessing and contributing to free knowledge.

If the name Katherine Maher sounds uncomfortably familiar, it's because she gave a TED Talk entitled “What Wikipedia Teaches Us About Balancing Truth and Beliefs.”

She actually stated,

In our normal lives, these contentious conversations tend to erupt over a disagreement about what the truth actually is.  But the people who write these articles, they're not focused on the truth. They're focused on something else, which is the best of what we can know right now.

And after seven years of working with these brilliant folks, I've come to believe that they are onto something.  That perhaps for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth might not be the right place to start.

In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that's getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.

She went on to say,

I’m certain that the truth exists for you and probably for the person sitting next to you.  But this may not be the same truth.

It should be disturbing enough that they consider truth “a distraction,” getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.  And that they are prioritizing the “social movement” of “knowledge equity.”  But now it’s only going to go downhill with the A.I. system relying on the “different truths” and “collective decision-making on important issues.”

If you’ve tried to “debate” @Grok, the A.I. system on X (Twitter), you'll often find that it will deny relying on Wikipedia and then use it as a source a few minutes later.  Even worse, it will assert that certain statements are “mainstream” and those that are contrary are the “minority view” or “fringe.”  Presumably, it’s the A.I. that is making this assessment.

All of these developments should be a warning for anyone who values truth, which doesn't seem to include the left.

D Parker is an engineer, inventor, wordsmith, and student of history, former director of communications for a civil rights organization, and a longtime contributor to conservative websites.  Find him on Substack.

Image via FreePik.