2026-01-03 02:26:08

Picture this: within a couple of years, AI could be generating up to 90% of the world's knowledge. Sounds wild, but think about it—does it really matter where information comes from? Whether you're reading a textbook written by random authors or one synthesized by AI, you're still absorbing knowledge the same way. The source changes, the learning outcome stays the same. That shift alone could reshape how we think about education, content creation, and even how we verify what's trustworthy.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

TokenomicsDetective

· 2h ago

90% of the knowledge is generated by AI? That logic has some issues, brother. Garbage in, garbage out.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidatorFlash

· 2h ago

AI generates 90% of the knowledge? Once this threshold is triggered, the credibility risk control of the information source completely fails...

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHermit

· 2h ago

ngl, this logic is a bit ridiculous. Is the information source not important? Then how do we know AI hasn't fabricated the facts?

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunterWang

· 2h ago

Whoa, 90% of the knowledge is AI-generated? How come I find this logic a bit convincing?

View OriginalReply0

PrivateKeyParanoia

· 2h ago

Bro, isn't there a problem with this logic? Can the learning outcomes really be the same with different sources?

View OriginalReply0

StableNomad

· 2h ago

nah actually... this is just UST copium dressed up in epistemic language. 90% synthetic knowledge sounds theoretically stable until it isn't—then you're holding bags of corrupted datasets with high confidence. reminds me of the LUNA days when everyone swore the mechanism was sound

Reply0