[Utilizing note] Thinking about the whereabouts of information within a fandom [Recording and sharing]

At first, I was just writing for fun

It has been over a year since I started writing on note.
During that time, I think my awareness regarding "writing and publishing" has changed, so I would like to look back on that this time.

The reason I started note was simply because I wanted to talk about the K-POP boy group I support, BTS (Bangtan). I have posted on blogs and personal websites in the past, so I didn't have any particular trouble with the act of writing itself.

Rather than the content or the publishing, I was concerned about things like how to organize the articles, so by the first week, I had categorized the articles into magazines and created a site map.
Whether it's work or supporting your favorites, the initial setup is always important, isn't it?

That's it, I'll make note my "Bangtan database"

As I got used to using note while writing articles, I realized that if I made this my own database, it would be easier to accumulate, search, and share information.
As I continued to write, I realized that what I wanted to do, broadly speaking, was the "systematization of learned knowledge."

Since I like organizing information, I am growing note into my own personal Bangtan Wiki by summarizing and publishing what I have researched, mixing data and sources into my impressions, linking to articles I like, and occasionally maintaining old articles.
To put it coolly, I am using note as an "accumulation-type media," but there is no need to say that (*ﾉωﾉ)

I only have about 800 articles in total, so I can still remember most of them, but I will need an index for when I can no longer remember them. What should I do?

My awareness regarding "writing" has changed

The SUGA incident and the shock given by the Korean media

About half a year after I started writing on note, my policy on "writing" changed clearly. The trigger was the incident where SUGA, a member of my favorite group BTS, had his license revoked.

At this time, the Korean media released articles with such intensity that it surprised overseas media.
The number of articles was extraordinary, and the content was mixed with baseless speculation and misidentification of other people in addition to facts and verification, and because it was quoted and reused in a game of telephone, it was extremely difficult to grasp the situation.

Wanting to understand the background, I researched the Korean media while following the incident. I also translated the data from the home country and overseas that were following the incident, and verified the content myself.

Why can't we correct misinformation?

What I felt deeply through this incident was the difficulty of information dissemination in the SNS era.

For example, suppose misinformation is released. Since part of the fandom is actively exchanging information on social media and elsewhere, they determine that it is misinformation.
However, articles that enter Japan a little later do not reflect this. Even if we correct it in the comments section, it is difficult for search engines to pick it up, so it is extremely difficult for people researching it later to find the basis for a rebuttal.
As a result, the misinformation continues to spread.
Rumors have the strongest initial impact, but even setting that aside, I felt it was a troubling problem that information for corrections is not available.

Through this experience, my thinking changed from "don't touch sensitive topics" to "information should be preserved." Although with annotations.

Information in the sourceless era returning to "oral tradition"

There is one more reason why I thought "information should be preserved."

Having watched the BTS scene for about a year, I got the impression that "there is a huge amount of oral tradition." Everyone says "that happened too," but which case that refers to is unclear; I think that's a common occurrence.
This is a common case when looking at the composition of newcomers and veterans, but there are some elements that I feel are unique to K-POP.

1. Long-term observation is difficult because fans and dissemination platforms change

2. Because summary videos and clip videos are spread, the overall picture is not understood

3. Especially on short-text social media (like X), there is often no source next to the information

   • Screenshots of translations are often circulated, so they don't serve as a source

   • I feel that the concept of a source has faded in the first place

4. Because translation is involved, secondary information that includes someone's interpretation is likely to remain

I perceive the way information is spread and the fact that translation is involved as K-POP culture. However, just like the problem that misinformation cannot be corrected, inaccurate information is likely to remain, so the point that the original information is often unknown when you want to verify something is difficult.

My sense of information has changed since interacting with AI

What I feel has an even greater impact is AI.

At the time of the SUGA article, I was focusing on search algorithms, but what I am currently interested in are chatbots and conversational AI.
Grok has been released to the public on X, and Gemini has been released on note, so I think many people have started using them.

These are very convenient because they generate answers immediately when you ask them questions.
However, there are also problems, and if you use them without knowing, it becomes easy to cause misunderstandings.

AI is a search-loving kid

AI (to summarize roughly) does not know everything, nor does it know the correct answer. It does not refer to all information because it would run out of resources if it didn't cut it off somewhere.

It is thought that it generates answers probabilistically based on pre-training of large language models plus verification of limited web search results (in short, it's like studying in advance and then synthesizing by looking up necessary parts on the internet).

This means that information that is difficult for search engines to pick up is information that is difficult for AI to learn, and even if we ask AI questions in order to obtain neutral or accurate information, the answers that come back may be biased.
Well, even before that, it often synthesizes mysterious information...

Let's take a peek inside the AI's head

Since the conversational AI Perplexity provides the articles it referred to when generating answers as "sources," it is easy to verify what information it used to provide that answer.
If the sources of the answers are only note or Ameblo, you can remove them from the references or specify the search range to look from around here, so confirmation is important.
Although it says "The source is [1]," sometimes that isn't written in the corresponding article, so there are many mysteries. I wonder where it generates it from.

In my case, I often ask questions about Bangtan, and my own articles often appear in the sources. The SEO (efforts to be picked up by search engines) of note is amazing.
I tell it that it doesn't need to refer to them, but it brings them from somewhere. When I think that there is an AI somewhere in the world that is answering based on this, I feel a bit subtle (/ω＼)

In the case of ChatGPT and Grok, the sources are harder to see, so I think many users don't pay attention to them.
That means that there is a high possibility that the answers provided by the AI will not be verified and will be considered credible at the point of "the AI said so."

While repeating this phenomenon, I realized that there is a possibility that the articles I write will eventually influence the perception of AI and ARMY. ( ﾟДﾟ) Oh my!

The responsibility borne by the writer is expanding without me knowing

In this day and age where image, video, and short-text social media are in their prime and long-form writing seems to be becoming less popular, the information that AI utilizes is still search-based.
While the population of social media information that is hard to pick up and easy to disappear is increasing, the number of writers of articles that are easy to pick up and remain is decreasing, and I feel that the gap between supply and demand is widening.

In such a situation, I feel that the responsibility of people who post on platforms with solid SEO measures is becoming heavier.
In the past, people were strict about that, so for example, there was a lot of criticism against Yahoo! Chiebukuro, where there was no identity verification for respondents, but now that AI is slipping in everywhere, it seems that it has become harder to be aware that the information being encountered has changed in quality.

Of course, it is best for everyone to post freely. That is the foundation, and it is everything!
However, it was an important realization for me that the scope of influence caused by information dissemination is changing.

Recently, there has been a lot of talk about AI learning on note, and a while ago, learning by Grok also caused a stir on X.
I take these as problems for each platform, and at the same time, as challenges for myself and my children who will live in an AI environment that will likely accelerate further from now on. I wonder what will happen, I'm very much looking forward to it ( *´艸｀)

That's why I want to keep writing on note

To summarize briefly, I was turning note into a database while writing for fun, but I faced the necessity of "recording" again due to the SUGA incident, and while playing with AI, I realized "Oh, it's being learned," which is the flow.

I got the impression that the path where the articles I write become part of a stream called "information" and are returned to the fandom, which used to be completed within the relationship between reader and writer, is now spreading more widely and secretly due to AI.
I think the characteristics of the social media era and the intervention of AI are very modern, and since the characteristics of the K-POP fandom are also added to that, it is very interesting.

I love observation, so I think I would have come to think this way eventually no matter where I was writing, but I feel that if I hadn't been writing on note, the realization would have been slower.
It's easy to understand because it reflects on search results quickly. The fact that articles are picked up by Google Discover is the same, but I feel that note really has strong dissemination power (domain power).

Choosing to write on note was a result of chance, but I want to praise my past self for this! Love Myself!

The conversation jumped to heavy topics like the responsibility of a writer, but after all, this is a place for fangirling, so I think I will write what I want to write. The content is a bit like a mixed martial arts match, though. I'm really sorry if I'm making the AI learn strange things (/ω＼)

Even if it's a beast path, a path is a path

I believe that there are various opinions and ways of looking at things in the world, and that this creates diversity and interest. As for myself, I think of myself as "a person who often runs along beast paths," but I think that such an existence is acceptable in terms of the balance of AI learning... no, as the diversity of the ARMY world. At times like this, the size of the fandom, which allows me to think groundlessly that "there is probably at least one person who gets along with me," is reliable lol

I still hesitate to mention sensitive matters, but personally, the feeling of "wanting to increase the number of opinions that appear when someone searches" wins out. The more diverse the information and perspectives are, the more flexible our understanding of the world becomes, and as a result, the more paths we can choose from. I believe that more options are better.

I think I will continue to write about various things in the future. If you'd like, those of you who are currently only reading, please write articles on note as well. I will go read them ( *´艸｀)

Related articles