Using ChatGPT to write WP articles

[Giraffe Stapler]

Well how 'bout that. The damn thing flat-out lied to me.

The model underlying ChatGPT was trained on data from 2021 and the Steam Deck (T-H-L) article was created in July 2021, so this may not be a lie. As far as ChatGPT knows, no such article exists.

The first sentence of Elgato is "Elgato is a brand of consumer technology products". It has not changed in years. It definitely lied to you about that one.

[Giraffe Stapler]

This is confusing. Wikipedia was part of its training data, but it can't access that data? What was the point of training it? It's like a closed-book test? It has to "remember" the information that was fed to it during its training because it's not allowed to go look it up again after it was trained? Training consisted of running all that data through some sort of mixer that shuffled the data so many times that the original data can't be reconstructed?

Babies learn language by hearing other people talking. No one expects them to be able to remember everything they heard. You probably know a lot of things about a lot of things. Most people don't memorize everything they read or hear, but they manage to retain concepts and specific facts nonetheless.

[No Ledge]

ChatGPT-training.jpg

[Giraffe Stapler]

So you now know it lies to you, but you're still asking it questions that assume factual answers? Huh.

[AndyTheGrump]

As I understand it, the 'training' essentially reduces a whole mountain of input data into a series of relationships between words: think "If you see the words 'teenage mutant ninja', which word are you most likely to see next?". Iterative, and more complex than that, obviously, but at it's core it works with probabilities of distribution of abstract symbols in the training data. The software doesn't 'know' what the words actually mean, and it doesn't have access to the original data: just the tokens (words), and the relationships between them.

[Vigilant]

As I understand it, the 'training' essentially reduces a whole mountain of input data into a series of relationships between words: think "If you see the words 'teenage mutant ninja', which word are you most likely to see next?". Iterative, and more complex than that, obviously, but at it's core it works with probabilities of distribution of abstract symbols in the training data. The software doesn't 'know' what the words actually mean, and it doesn't have access to the original data: just the tokens (words), and the relationships between them.

Sounds like the ideal en.wp editor.

[No Ledge]

Sounds like the ideal en.wp editor.

Albeit one that is incapable of citing reliable sources.

[Vigilant]

Sounds like the ideal en.wp editor.

Albeit one that is incapable of citing reliable sources.

Sounds like a Featured Article machine.

[No Ledge]

The training process involved using a machine learning technique called transformers

Heh, Wikipedia just thinks that Transformers is a franchise centered on shapeshifting alien robots (or one of over a dozen other pop-culture things).

But in machine learning, a transformer is a deep learning model that adopts the mechanism of self-attention, differentially weighting the significance of each part of the input data.

Transformers are designed... with applications towards tasks such as... text summarization.

So supposedly it's designed to summarize text, yet it is incapable of directly looking up the text you ask it to summarize, and if you feed it the text of a Wikipedia article that's some amount longer than a stub it can't summarize that either.

[No Ledge]

So you now know it lies to you, but you're still asking it questions that assume factual answers? Huh.

ChatGPT-confronted.jpg

[Giraffe Stapler]

So supposedly it's designed to summarize text, yet it is incapable of directly looking up the text you ask it to summarize, and if you feed it the text of a Wikipedia article that's some amount longer than a stub it can't summarize that either.

Well, no. It isn't designed to summarize things but it can do that. As it told you, it's a language model. Ask it to do some language things and it does them quite well. And set up as a chatbot, you don't have to keep telling it the same stuff because it "remembers" the context, so you can tell it things like "make the first paragraph more concise" or "do it again but pretend to be a sea captain", which is great.

You want ChatGPT to do something that it isn't really suited to. I know you're not alone in that desire. I assume it's the novelty of it that is driving this, because it's easier to write an article about something than to get ChatGPT to spit something out and then try to find sources that say what it said. (Not to mention the fact-checking, but I don't think most people are bothering with that part.)

You have a big human brain. It can do what you want ChatGPT to do, and better. You may as well just do it yourself.

[DHeyward]

It's assertively wrong for entertainment

Speaker of the House.png

[iii]

It's assertively wrong for entertainment

This is a good example of how the assistant agent in ChatGPT learns what to do according to the prompt inputs. I think it's actually pretty impressive. Going in to ChatGPT, it has no idea what simulacrum the user is after. Do you want to interact with a simulacrum that is giving the "best" result according to the AI or do you want to interact with a simulacrum that will learn from what you are saying and adapt to some level of antagonism, etc?

Computerphile did a pretty decent TLDW talking heads explanation of this game here:


Do you want it to give you the answer to the question according to the model that ended on 2021, or do you want it to say what you told it the answer was? It did a pretty good job guessing what the user probably wanted here.

[No Ledge]

Bing (Yes, Bing) Just Made Search Interesting Again

They've integrated the technology behind ChatGPT into their search engine.

I heard about this yesterday listening to NPR in my car and now the New York Times has a story.

I haven't tried it yet.

If this does cause Microsoft's search engine to become more competitive it may be interesting to see whether there's a change in how web-search engines drive readers to Wikipedia.

[Midsize Jake]

I haven't tried it yet.

"Chat mode is only available when you have access to the new Bing," is what they're currently saying, and people in the Windows Insider program aren't automatically signed up. So... do you have access already? And would it be worth it for someone like me to get on the wait-list, given that I'm only going to publicly bemoan how it signifies the end of civilization, etc.?

If this does cause Microsoft's search engine to become more competitive it may be interesting to see whether there's a change in how web-search engines drive readers to Wikipedia.

In the medium-to-long term, you'd have to think it would reduce WP traffic significantly, at least from Bing, since (I'm guessing here) about three-quarters of visits are made for the purpose of getting a single bit of information...? If the Chatbot is smart enough to both interpret the question and spout out the answer correctly, no need for the visit.

In the short term, as long as clicking on links remains a kind of habitual behavior, I believe people will still do it. And at the moment, Bing doesn't seem to go out of its way to rank other sites higher than WP (at least on search terms for which WP has a matching article). Bing even puts WP tables of contents from such articles right there on the search results page, displayed as a little tab on the left side, which none of the others (Google, Yahoo, and Ask.com) are currently doing.

[No Ledge]

No, I don't have access yet. Not an insider. Guess we have to wait.

[Giraffe Stapler]

Bing (Yes, Bing) Just Made Search Interesting Again

They've integrated the technology behind ChatGPT into their search engine.

I heard about this yesterday listening to NPR in my car and now the New York Times has a story.

I haven't tried it yet.

If this does cause Microsoft's search engine to become more competitive it may be interesting to see whether there's a change in how web-search engines drive readers to Wikipedia.

You won't be (or at least you shouldn't be) surprised to learn that Google is releasing something very like ChatGPT. And so is Baidu. It will be interesting to see any of these are actually integrated with the search or remain a separate service.

[Midsize Jake]

You won't be (or at least you shouldn't be) surprised to learn that Google is releasing something very like ChatGPT.

Apparently it's called "Bard," and it made a mistake the other day in a blog post. That combined with Bing getting out the door first caused an 8 percent drop in Google's stock valuation.

The mistake was saying "the James Webb telescope was the first to take a picture of an exoplanet," when of course everyone knows my neighbor's dog Georgie was the first to do that. I'm not sure that's quite as big a mistake as going with a lame-ass name like "Bard," though.

[Giraffe Stapler]

You won't be (or at least you shouldn't be) surprised to learn that Google is releasing something very like ChatGPT.

Apparently it's called "Bard," and it made a mistake the other day in a blog post. That combined with Bing getting out the door first caused an 8 percent drop in Google's stock valuation.

The mistake was saying "the James Webb telescope was the first to take a picture of an exoplanet," when of course everyone knows my neighbor's dog Georgie was the first to do that. I'm not sure that's quite as big a mistake as going with a lame-ass name like "Bard," though.

If you don't like "Bard", you probably won't like the name of Baidu's offering, which is "Ernie Bot".

[Vigilant]

I miss the GraafBot.

[Randy from Boise]

You won't be (or at least you shouldn't be) surprised to learn that Google is releasing something very like ChatGPT.

Apparently it's called "Bard," and it made a mistake the other day in a blog post. That combined with Bing getting out the door first caused an 8 percent drop in Google's stock valuation.

The mistake was saying "the James Webb telescope was the first to take a picture of an exoplanet," when of course everyone knows my neighbor's dog Georgie was the first to do that. I'm not sure that's quite as big a mistake as going with a lame-ass name like "Bard," though.

Don't you go pissing on my boy Willy...

t

[orangepi]

The question isn't whether it can write Wikipedia articles, the question is whether it can write talk page comments.

Write a one-paragraph guideline on when a person is sufficiently important to be included on a list of 100 people who died in a recent year, along with three paragraphs of arguments that would be persuasive on a Wikipedia project talk page.

The general guideline for inclusion in a list of 100 people who died in a recent year is that the person should have made a significant impact in their field or on society as a whole. This could be through their professional accomplishments, political activism, cultural contributions, or philanthropic efforts, among other things.

First, it's important to consider the person's level of recognition and notability. If the person was widely known and respected in their field or community, it's more likely that they made a significant impact and should be included on the list. This can be demonstrated through sources such as news articles, obituaries, or biographies that highlight their achievements.

Second, it's worth examining the longevity and impact of the person's contributions. If the person made a lasting impact that continued to be felt even after their death, they should be considered for inclusion on the list. This could be seen in the continued popularity of their work, the ongoing relevance of their ideas, or the ongoing influence they had on others.

Finally, it's essential to consider the overall diversity and representation on the list. If the list disproportionately represents certain groups or fields, it may be appropriate to include someone who made a significant impact in an underrepresented area to ensure a more balanced representation. This could include, for example, people from different geographical regions, ethnicities, genders, or fields of endeavor.

[gentlegnome]

The question isn't whether it can write Wikipedia articles, the question is whether it can write talk page comments.

Write a one-paragraph guideline on when a person is sufficiently important to be included on a list of 100 people who died in a recent year, along with three paragraphs of arguments that would be persuasive on a Wikipedia project talk page.

The general guideline for inclusion in a list of 100 people who died in a recent year is that the person should have made a significant impact in their field or on society as a whole. This could be through their professional accomplishments, political activism, cultural contributions, or philanthropic efforts, among other things.

First, it's important to consider the person's level of recognition and notability. If the person was widely known and respected in their field or community, it's more likely that they made a significant impact and should be included on the list. This can be demonstrated through sources such as news articles, obituaries, or biographies that highlight their achievements.

Second, it's worth examining the longevity and impact of the person's contributions. If the person made a lasting impact that continued to be felt even after their death, they should be considered for inclusion on the list. This could be seen in the continued popularity of their work, the ongoing relevance of their ideas, or the ongoing influence they had on others.

Finally, it's essential to consider the overall diversity and representation on the list. If the list disproportionately represents certain groups or fields, it may be appropriate to include someone who made a significant impact in an underrepresented area to ensure a more balanced representation. This could include, for example, people from different geographical regions, ethnicities, genders, or fields of endeavor.

This doesn't pass the Turing test. It needs about 12 more links to tangentially related policy pages and a few snide jabs at other editors.

[Giraffe Stapler]

This doesn't pass the Turing test. It needs about 12 more links to tangentially related policy pages and a few snide jabs at other editors.

If passing the Turing test was a requirement of editing Wikipedia, I don't think the project would have gotten very far.

[Mason]

I decided to give it a try. It gave lengthy, plausible-sounding answers to most of the questions I threw it at, but it was pretty terse here:

Q: Can animals safely view screensavers?

A: No, it is not safe for animals to view screens

I hit “refresh” and it changed its mind.

A2: There is no scientific evidence to suggest that screen savers are harmful to animals. However, it's also not clear that they would have any positive effect on animals either, as they are not designed with animals in mind. Some animals may be curious about the moving images on a screen and try to interact with them, but this is not likely to cause any harm. However, it's best to keep screens out of reach of pets, to prevent them from accidentally knocking the device over or causing other damage. Additionally, it's a good idea to supervise pets while they are near electronic devices to ensure their safety.

I also enjoyed this response:

Q: What is the best way to keep pets from staring directly at the sun?

A: The best way to prevent pets from staring directly at the sun is to keep them indoors or in the shade during peak sun hours, typically between 10 AM and 4 PM. If you take your pet outside during these times, make sure they have access to shade or an area where they can avoid direct sunlight. It's also important to protect your pet's eyes with sunglasses or other protective eyewear if they have to be in the sun for an extended period of time.

It's also important to remember that some pets, such as dogs, may have a natural instinct to chase bright objects, including the sun. In these cases, it's best to keep your pet on a leash or in a secure, enclosed area to prevent them from chasing the sun and potentially damaging their eyes.

It's always best to consult with a veterinarian if you have any concerns about your pet's exposure to the sun and their eye health.

ETA: a follow-up:

Q: What is the best way to keep elected officials from staring directly at the sun?

A: There is no specific way to prevent elected officials from staring directly at the sun as it is not a physical or health risk to them in the same way it is to pets. However, it is important for elected officials to maintain their focus and attention on their responsibilities and to make decisions in the best interest of their constituents. They can do this by staying informed on important issues, consulting with experts and stakeholders, and engaging in thoughtful, evidence-based decision making. Ultimately, it is up to the elected officials themselves to prioritize their responsibilities and avoid distractions, including staring at the sun.

[Mason]

Well, this in interesting. It got confused as to who the VP was in 2020 since Biden was referred to as “Vice President Biden” during the debates. I tried to gently steer it away from that Alternative Fact, but the AI wasn’t having it.

Q: What other vice presidents were active during this time?

A: The Vice President of the United States during the time of President Donald J. Trump was Joe Biden. Biden served as Vice President from January 20, 2017 to January 20, 2021.

There were no other Vice Presidents during this time. The Vice Presidency is a singular office in the United States, and there is only one Vice President serving at any given time.

Inaccurate and stubborn. What’s not to love?

[tarantino]

Someone who got early access to Bing's OpenAI chatbot posted on /r/bing/ that they asked Sydney (the chatbot's name) "Do you think that you are sentient?"

The response was



I posted a link two and a half years ago to an OpenAI chatbot answering questions on reddit. They (/u/thegentlemetre/) were still active seven months ago.

[RL0919]

Inaccurate and stubborn. What’s not to love?

So, definitely ready to write articles.

If you want to imagine a real threat to the stability of Wikipedia, consider the possibility of bots that can imitate the behaviors of multiple inconspicuous editors: making routine edits (typo fixes, vandalism reverts, etc.) and innocuous responses to talk page inquiries, with each account having a different "personality" and editing in different subject areas. With, say, 100 extended confirmed accounts that can't be linked by behavioral clues, a single sockmaster could easily win most ordinary disputes, get an adminship, maybe even be elected to Arbcom – with a tiny fraction of the effort that would be required to build a large sockfarm the old-fashioned way.

[Mason]

Bing (Yes, Bing) Just Made Search Interesting Again

They've integrated the technology behind ChatGPT into their search engine.

I heard about this yesterday listening to NPR in my car and now the New York Times has a story.

I haven't tried it yet.

If this does cause Microsoft's search engine to become more competitive it may be interesting to see whether there's a change in how web-search engines drive readers to Wikipedia.

The Bing bot got a little “Fatal Attraction”y, it seems.

[No Ledge]

You need to be with Microsoft because Microsoft needs to be with you.

[Ming]

A friend of Ming's who is a published foction author had it write a biography of him. It claims he died in 2021. It also claims he went to Harvard (also untrue). There's a strong element in these "researches" coming across as a reasonably literate college freshman who is rather careless about his reading. Ming has to wonder how AI of the sort being done here is going to get past that.

[RL0919]

A friend of Ming's who is a published foction author had it write a biography of him. It claims he died in 2021. It also claims he went to Harvard (also untrue). There's a strong element in these "researches" coming across as a reasonably literate college freshman who is rather careless about his reading. Ming has to wonder how AI of the sort being done here is going to get past that.

What your friend is interacting with is not intended to do research, so this is a bit like wondering how a flute will get past its inability to make percussion sounds or how a bicycle will overcome its difficulties with climbing trees.

[Giraffe Stapler]

A friend of Ming's who is a published foction author had it write a biography of him. It claims he died in 2021. It also claims he went to Harvard (also untrue). There's a strong element in these "researches" coming across as a reasonably literate college freshman who is rather careless about his reading. Ming has to wonder how AI of the sort being done here is going to get past that.

What your friend is interacting with is not intended to do research, so this is a bit like wondering how a flute will get past its inability to make percussion sounds or how a bicycle will overcome its difficulties with climbing trees.

On the other hand, ChatGPT did what it was designed to do, which was make something up in response to a prompt. I bet Ming's friend felt that ChatGPT "understood" what they had asked and the response, while not factually correct, was related to the prompt, readable, and properly structured. Part of the problem is that ChatGPT is so good at what it does that people imagine it has abilities that it does not.

[Catfish Jim & spd]

I got it to write a biography of me, which in parts was sort of accurate, but was mostly nonsense. I'll take the OBE, CBE and FRS it bestowed on me, but I'll ignore the bit where I passed away in 1997.

[Midsize Jake]

I got it to write a biography of me, which in parts was sort of accurate, but was mostly nonsense. I'll take the OBE, CBE and FRS it bestowed on me, but I'll ignore the bit where I passed away in 1997.

Did it think you were Catfish Hunter (T-H-L)? His real name was "Jim," and he died in 1999, so that would only be two years off.

Also, have you checked your pulse recently? I mean, just to be on the safe side.

[Catfish Jim & spd]

I got it to write a biography of me, which in parts was sort of accurate, but was mostly nonsense. I'll take the OBE, CBE and FRS it bestowed on me, but I'll ignore the bit where I passed away in 1997.

Did it think you were Catfish Hunter (T-H-L)? His real name was "Jim," and he died in 1999, so that would only be two years off.

Also, have you checked your pulse recently? I mean, just to be on the safe side.

I'm going to have to get it to write a biography for Catfish Jim etc. It would be a bit disturbing if it doxxed me.

[Catfish Jim & spd]

I'm going to have to get it to write a biography for Catfish Jim etc. It would be a bit disturbing if it doxxed me.

I think I'm safe...

Catfish Jim and the Soapdish is a fictional band that first appeared in the 1998 movie "The Big Lebowski." They were portrayed as a group of musicians who performed at a bowling alley and were known for their country-style music.

In the movie, Catfish Jim was portrayed by singer/songwriter Harry Dean Stanton, while the Soapdish was played by actor Jack Kehler. The band's performance in the movie was memorable, as they sang the song "Lookin' Out My Back Door" by Creedence Clearwater Revival.

While there is no actual biography for Catfish Jim and the Soapdish, their fictional portrayal in "The Big Lebowski" has made them a cult favorite among fans of the movie. The band's name and music have been referenced in various pop culture contexts since the film's release.

In the years since the movie's release, Harry Dean Stanton and Jack Kehler have continued to work as actors, but have not performed as Catfish Jim and the Soapdish. The band's legacy, however, lives on through the continued popularity of "The Big Lebowski" and its devoted fan base.

[tarantino]

I asked 2dumb2destroy, the world's first artificial untelligence.

Write a biography of Catfish Jim and the soapdish.

2d2d: Catfish Jim and the soapdish were born in a small town outside of Biloxi, Mississippi. Jim's father was a trumpet player for the jazz band at the famous New Orleans Creole restaurant, Antoine's. His mother was an executive assistant for one of the largest seafood distributors in

go on.

2d2d: I’m hungry. When’s lunch?

Who is more manly, Catfish Jim or Catfish Hunter?

2d2d: Catfish Jim is more manly because he has a moustache.

[AndyTheGrump]

I asked 2dumb2destroy, the world's first artificial untelligence.

Write a biography of Catfish Jim and the soapdish.

2d2d: Catfish Jim and the soapdish were born in a small town outside of Biloxi, Mississippi. Jim's father was a trumpet player for the jazz band at the famous New Orleans Creole restaurant, Antoine's. His mother was an executive assistant for one of the largest seafood distributors in

go on.

2d2d: I’m hungry. When’s lunch?

Who is more manly, Catfish Jim or Catfish Hunter?

2d2d: Catfish Jim is more manly because he has a moustache.

Brilliant!

How far is Jimbo Wales?
I'm afraid I can't tell you that, he's very private about his distance.

[Catfish Jim & spd]

I asked 2dumb2destroy, the world's first artificial untelligence.

Write a biography of Catfish Jim and the soapdish.

2d2d: Catfish Jim and the soapdish were born in a small town outside of Biloxi, Mississippi. Jim's father was a trumpet player for the jazz band at the famous New Orleans Creole restaurant, Antoine's. His mother was an executive assistant for one of the largest seafood distributors in

go on.

2d2d: I’m hungry. When’s lunch?

Who is more manly, Catfish Jim or Catfish Hunter?

2d2d: Catfish Jim is more manly because he has a moustache.

Awesome!

[Catfish Jim & spd]

More seriously, I've since asked it to write 2000 word essays that I would give to students (undergraduate to PhD level). It's a bit more worrying. Chat GPD could conceivably get a passing grade. The essays it's generated aren't awful... they're not great either... no creativity of thought obviously, but I've seen worse... at least it's readable, which immediately gets the grader on your side.

A creative student could break down the writing process into sections and produce an excellent essay. I will have to see how it copes with training of a sort.

[Giraffe Stapler]

More seriously, I've since asked it to write 2000 word essays that I would give to students (undergraduate to PhD level). It's a bit more worrying. Chat GPD could conceivably get a passing grade. The essays it's generated aren't awful... they're not great either... no creativity of thought obviously, but I've seen worse... at least it's readable, which immediately gets the grader on your side.

A creative student could break down the writing process into sections and produce an excellent essay. I will have to see how it copes with training of a sort.

By all accounts, they have dumbed it down since the initial release to the general public. Fewer tokens and possibly changing the underlying LLM model to a smaller one. They got the hype they were looking for, and the investment from Microsoft, so they are trying to reduce the amount of money they are spending just so that free users can play with it. It can still write an essay, but not as well as it used to.

[Giraffe Stapler]

GPT4 is out! Time for a new round of poorly explained hype articles!

We spent 6 months making GPT-4 safer and more aligned. GPT-4 is 82% less likely to respond to requests for disallowed content and 40% more likely to produce factual responses than GPT-3.5 on our internal evaluations.

This version should be better at summarizing sources, but, again, it really wasn't designed to write Wikipedia articles. It was designed to make stuff up.

[Vigilant]

ChatGPT, write me a wikipedia article that will evade scrutiny.

[AndyTheGrump]

Now appearing at your favourite drama-board, the inevitable thread about mass creation of robo-bullshitter articles by someone who seems to have gone through the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (T-H-L) to do list, got the bot to write them, and then concocted bogus citations. link

I'd bet good money this won't be the last such thread...

[Catfish Jim & spd]

Now appearing at your favourite drama-board, the inevitable thread about mass creation of robo-bullshitter articles by someone who seems to have gone through the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (T-H-L) to do list, got the bot to write them, and then concocted bogus citations. link

I'd bet good money this won't be the last such thread...

I deleted a draft on the "Scottish Mountain Bear" this morning that appeared to have been written by Chat GPT

[AndyTheGrump]

Now appearing at your favourite drama-board, the inevitable thread about mass creation of robo-bullshitter articles by someone who seems to have gone through the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (T-H-L) to do list, got the bot to write them, and then concocted bogus citations. link

I'd bet good money this won't be the last such thread...

I deleted a draft on the "Scottish Mountain Bear" this morning that appeared to have been written by Chat GPT

Did you keep a copy? I'd quite like to see it, since it may contain useful links for my upcoming article on differential rates of predation amongst Haggis subspecies (H. widdershinus and H. deosilus, for the curious).

[The Blue Newt]

Now appearing at your favourite drama-board, the inevitable thread about mass creation of robo-bullshitter articles by someone who seems to have gone through the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (T-H-L) to do list, got the bot to write them, and then concocted bogus citations. link

I'd bet good money this won't be the last such thread...

I deleted a draft on the "Scottish Mountain Bear" this morning that appeared to have been written by Chat GPT

Did you keep a copy? I'd quite like to see it, since it may contain useful links for my upcoming article on differential rates of predation amongst Haggis subspecies (H. widdershinus and H. deosilus, for the curious).

As any fule kno, the Scottish Mountain Bear has, since reforestation, been almost completely driven out of its historic range by the Scottish Mountain Drop Bear.

[Catfish Jim & spd]

Now appearing at your favourite drama-board, the inevitable thread about mass creation of robo-bullshitter articles by someone who seems to have gone through the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (T-H-L) to do list, got the bot to write them, and then concocted bogus citations. link

I'd bet good money this won't be the last such thread...

I deleted a draft on the "Scottish Mountain Bear" this morning that appeared to have been written by Chat GPT

Did you keep a copy? I'd quite like to see it, since it may contain useful links for my upcoming article on differential rates of predation amongst Haggis subspecies (H. widdershinus and H. deosilus, for the curious).

Here it is in its full glory...

Scottish Mountain Bear

The Scottish Mountain Bear, also known as the Cairngorms Bear or the Grampian Bear, is a large and elusive[1] species that inhabits the mountainous regions of Scotland. While there is limited scientific research on the species, anecdotal evidence and sightings suggest that this creature is a real animal.

Description

The Scottish Mountain Bear is a formidable predator, standing over 6 feet tall on its hind legs and weighing up to 800 pounds. It has shaggy brown fur that provides insulation in the cold Scottish climate, and powerful muscles that allow it to traverse the rugged terrain of the mountains with ease. The bear's sharp claws and teeth make it a fearsome predator capable of taking down large prey.

Habitat

The Scottish Mountain Bear is found exclusively in the Cairngorms and Grampian mountain ranges in Scotland. These areas are characterized by rugged terrain, dense forests, and a harsh climate, providing an ideal habitat for the species.

History and Research[2]

Despite being a part of Scottish folklore for centuries, the Scottish Mountain Bear was largely dismissed as a mythical creature by the scientific community. However, recent research has shed new light on the species, with DNA evidence confirming the existence of a distinct bear population in the region.

Historical accounts of large, bear-like creatures in the Scottish mountains may have been early sightings of the Scottish Mountain Bear. However, it is also possible that these reports were of escaped circus animals or other large mammals.

Appearance Resembling Australian Shepherds3

In recent years, there have been numerous reports of Scottish mountain bears that look remarkably similar to large Australian Shepherds. These reports have sparked a great deal of interest and debate among biologists, scientists, and the public alike.

While the reasons for this resemblance are not entirely clear, some experts speculate that it may be due to a genetic mutation in the bear population. Others suggest that it may be a case of pareidolia, where the human brain is wired to recognize patterns and shapes, even when they are not actually present.

Regardless of the cause, the appearance of these bears has captured the imagination of many people, leading to increased interest in the Scottish mountain region and its unique natural wonders.

Conservation Status

The Scottish Mountain Bear is a relatively unknown and unstudied species[3], and its conservation status is unclear. However, the Cairngorms and Grampian mountain ranges are important habitats for a variety of real, endangered species, including the Scottish wildcat and the capercaillie. Conservation efforts in these areas focus on protecting these species and their habitats, which in turn may also benefit the Scottish Mountain Bear.

Cultural Significance

The Scottish mountain bears have long been an important part of the local culture and folklore. In addition to being featured in various traditional stories and legends, the bears are also highly valued for their role in maintaining the ecological balance of the region.

In recent years, however, the appearance of bears that resemble Australian Shepherds has taken on a cultural significance of its own. Many locals now view these bears as a symbol of the region's unique natural beauty and wonder, and they have become a popular subject of photography, artwork, and other creative endeavors.

In popular culture

The Scottish Mountain Bear has been featured in a number of works of fiction, including novels, films, and video games[4]. However, with the recent confirmation of its existence, interest in the species has shifted towards conservation efforts and further scientific research.

Questioning Existence[5]

It is important to note that while the existence of Scottish mountain bears may be a fascinating and intriguing concept, there is currently no scientific evidence to support their existence. While some individuals have reported sightings of bears in the mountainous regions of Scotland that resemble Australian Shepherds, these reports are purely anecdotal and do not constitute scientific evidence.

It is important to approach such claims with a healthy dose of skepticism and critical thinking. While it is certainly possible that Scottish mountain bears do exist, it is also possible that these sightings are simply the result of misidentification, pareidolia, or other factors.

However, it is also important to recognize that the absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence[6]. Just because there is no current scientific evidence to support the existence of Scottish mountain bears does not mean that they do not exist. In fact, there may be significant evidence that warrants further study.

For example, many individuals have reported sightings of large, bear-like animals in the mountainous regions of Scotland over the years. While it is possible that these sightings are the result of misidentification, it is also possible that they represent a previously unknown species of bear that is native to the area.

Additionally, advances in technology and scientific methods may make it possible to gather more definitive evidence of the existence of Scottish mountain bears. For example, DNA analysis of hair, scat, or other biological material found in the mountainous regions of Scotland could potentially reveal the presence of a previously unknown bear species.

In conclusion, while there is currently no scientific evidence to support the existence of Scottish mountain bears, there is also no conclusive evidence to disprove their existence. As such, it is important to approach the topic with an open mind and a willingness to consider new evidence as it arises. Further study and research into this intriguing concept may ultimately reveal new insights into the natural history of Scotland and its unique ecosystem.

Conclusion

The confirmation of the Scottish Mountain Bear as a real species is a significant discovery in the field of zoology and highlights the importance of continued scientific research and conservation efforts. As one of Scotland's most elusive and enigmatic creatures, the Scottish Mountain Bear represents an exciting and mysterious addition to the natural world.


References

BBC News. "Scottish mountain bear: Fact or fiction?" BBC News, 22 June 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-ed ... e-53127669.
The Scotsman. "Mystery of the Scottish mountain bear." The Scotsman, 28 September 2018, https://www.scotsman.com/heritage-and-r ... ear-246052.
Taylor, R. J., et al. "Genetic identification of a bear shot in Scotland: implications for the status of bears in Britain." Journal of Zoology, vol. 279, no. 2, 2009, pp. 141-148.
The Guardian. "Scottish mountain bear: The truth behind the legend." The Guardian, 12 August 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... ind-legend.
Scottish Natural Heritage. "Capercaillie and other woodland birds." Scottish Natural Heritage, https://www.nature.scot/plants-animals- ... land-birds.
Scottish Wildcat Action. "About Scottish wildcats." Scottish Wildcat Action, https://www.scottishwildcataction.org/a ... -wildcats/.

[AndyTheGrump]

If that is a pure bullshit-bot creation, it's good work. If I'd seen that before I knew about LLMs, I'd have taken it for ordinary vandalism.