6 ms·

I can't help but read this like: Let me show you how dangerous sidewalks are by telling you the story about the time I went for a walk while swingi

I can't help but read this like: Let me show you how dangerous sidewalks are by telling you the story about the time I went for a walk while swinging a spiked bat at every passer by. It was great fun, but it demonstrates why sidewalks are dangerous.

gilrain 10y ago
And considering the respectable sources have since corrected his misinformation, tack on a: "That neighborhood is now better policed, but still, you never know!"
knodi123 10y ago
How many articles have had the premise "You can't trust wikipedia, because it's full of lies! Why, just look at this handful of lies I've put on there!"
- incongruity 10y ago
  But that's not what this is, really. It points out the greater danger of the propagation of those lies. It's entirely reasonable to assume others might similarly lie and this article demonstrates how such lies can propagate through the internet in certain cases.
  - knodi123 10y ago
    Yes, but his point would be much stronger if it had not been based merely on assumptions. If this is such a problem, then be a journalist- find an example and discuss that.
    - Sean1708 10y ago
      But, he was the example.
      - knodi123 10y ago
        I mean, find an example of the problem, instead of creating a problem, and assuming it's widespread.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  Ironically, Wikipedia seems to be the only place you can actually trust about Street Sharks...
- DanBC 10y ago
  But this isn't about someone editing Wikipedia, and saying "look at Wikipedia". This is about someone editing some minor little website, and then a bunch of companies and other websites copying that information, and then other people saying that information is true and accurate, and even expanding on it with their own memories about the misinformation. That's the scary thing - that people build on the lie. I might not trust that little website, but I should be able to trust Netflix.
- nkrisc 10y ago
  The difference is these lies survived for years and were repurposed all the while no one actually bothered to verify them.
  - euyyn 10y ago
    Yeah and why would anyone bother?
tryitnow 10y ago
No. It's more like he was swinging a foam bat and is warning us how easy it would be for someone more malicious to swing a spiked bat. Seriously, I don't really care if some teenager creates a non-sense fanfic world on poorly monitored sites. However, it is noteworthy how the utter lack of quality control on so many Internet properties can propagate falsehoods. This undermines the claim that the Internet was supposed to be this "Information Superhighway" (lol, remember that term?) leading to a more informed society. This just hasn't panned out the way the tech utopians of the 90s thought it would. What they failed to foresee is that the abundance of information can lead to just as much ignorance as the lack of information.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- mangeletti 10y ago
  I think the problems you're bringing up cannot be solved. Information (re: "Information Superhighway") is information. In this utopian idea of "quality control", who does the quality control? Houghton Mifflin[1]? If history is just a set of lies agreed upon[2], I'd rather have the consensus of the Internet than whoever it is you purport should be in control of quality. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/09/12/proposed-texas-textbooks-are-inaccurate-biased-and-politicized-new-report-finds/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/09/... 2. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/napoleonbo161968.html http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/napoleonbo161968....
  - GrumpyYoungMan 10y ago
    Not necessarily. The key problem is that primary sources are either in non-searchable hardcopy format (books, etc.) or inaccessible behind paywalls, making it impractical to do wide-ranging research outside of the academic libraries maintained by by large universities. It would take quite a major revision to copyright law but it's not impossible to imagine some future version of a library where one can search digitized versions of all known works and correlate between them.
  - 10y ago
itp 10y ago
I see what you're getting at. I'm reminded of the discussion and debate around the Rosenhan experiment[0]. That said, I think your analogy isn't quite on point. The noteworthy thing here isn't just that it's possible to lie on the internet -- people have clearly been doing that for a while. What's interesting here is that those lies, while not at the time intended as an experiment, have still demonstrated how perniciously they can become a part of what is becoming our collective memory and record of truth. We already know that our memories are malleable, fuzzy, adaptive, and often downright wrong. It's interesting to see how this relates to the possibility that lies, or untruths, take on a life of their own online, and can serve to mold our own recollections. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment
smcl 10y ago
I don't think "be wary of lies on the Internet" was the message, more "I did a funny thing and the Internet is dumb sometimes" - I was in tears laughing at some of the stupid episode summaries. And the irony that free-for-all Wikipedia was the only accurate source was pretty good too
- wtetzner 10y ago
  Likely because the people who wrote the Wikipedia article actually watched the episodes or were fans of the show. The other places just copied the information from whatever source they had available, which happened to be from tvtome.com.
coldtea 10y ago
Can't find any fault with the argument. If he did that for fun, tons of others can do it for fan, more with malicious intent, even more for profit, even more than those from idiocy and repeating misinformation, etc.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  And many do. Remember that "I rm -rf'd my production server" story recently, and how it turned out to be a lie? Remember that "school treats a kid as a terrorist because he brought a DIY clock to class" thing that after weeks of media coverage turned out to be a completely different story?
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Exactly. Though, about the latter story (kid, clock etc.) I've followed it a little at the time, but what do you mean "turned out to be a completely different story"? From what I know it was like what it was reported from the start. And Obama even called the kid to the whitehouse later. Am I missing some development?
kalleboo 10y ago
If it was just "there are lies on the Internet - I just posted some!" Then yeah. To me this story is more how they propagate. Who knew Netflix didn't get their metadata from the production company itself?
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  My guess is that they're filled in by low-paid (or unpaid) interns. I'm especially wary of anything that has even a touch of marketing involved with it. Especially on social media. You know how all those photos with words are made - be it dietary advice or philosophy quotes or whatever? I had some ideas, but wasn't really sure until my SO did an internship with a social media marketing company. It's literally: 1) Google for some keywords on the topic you need, 2) take the first article or blog post that pops up, 3) find a good enough quote or idea on it, 4) pick a random picture from the Internet, 5) stick the two together in Photoshop or Paint.NET, 6) spam the living shit out of all your channels with it. It's that. Zero research. And preferably done by unpaid interns.
- jbenz 10y ago
  Let's say Netflix asks the production company for the cast. DIC Entertainment went defunct 7 years ago. Let's say they were still around though. Would someone there have to dig through physical filing cabinets? Or would they just google it? Bottom line: Henry Winkler voicing a shark as a meta-jumped-the-shark reference is brilliant.

gilrain 10y ago

And considering the respectable sources have since corrected his misinformation, tack on a: "That neighborhood is now better policed, but still, you never know!"

knodi123 10y ago

How many articles have had the premise "You can't trust wikipedia, because it's full of lies! Why, just look at this handful of lies I've put on there!"

incongruity 10y ago
But that's not what this is, really. It points out the greater danger of the propagation of those lies. It's entirely reasonable to assume others might similarly lie and this article demonstrates how such lies can propagate through the internet in certain cases.
- knodi123 10y ago
  Yes, but his point would be much stronger if it had not been based merely on assumptions. If this is such a problem, then be a journalist- find an example and discuss that.
  - Sean1708 10y ago
    But, he was the example.
    - knodi123 10y ago
      I mean, find an example of the problem, instead of creating a problem, and assuming it's widespread.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
Ironically, Wikipedia seems to be the only place you can actually trust about Street Sharks...
DanBC 10y ago
But this isn't about someone editing Wikipedia, and saying "look at Wikipedia". This is about someone editing some minor little website, and then a bunch of companies and other websites copying that information, and then other people saying that information is true and accurate, and even expanding on it with their own memories about the misinformation. That's the scary thing - that people build on the lie. I might not trust that little website, but I should be able to trust Netflix.
nkrisc 10y ago
The difference is these lies survived for years and were repurposed all the while no one actually bothered to verify them.
- euyyn 10y ago
  Yeah and why would anyone bother?

tryitnow 10y ago

No. It's more like he was swinging a foam bat and is warning us how easy it would be for someone more malicious to swing a spiked bat. Seriously, I don't really care if some teenager creates a non-sense fanfic world on poorly monitored sites. However, it is noteworthy how the utter lack of quality control on so many Internet properties can propagate falsehoods. This undermines the claim that the Internet was supposed to be this "Information Superhighway" (lol, remember that term?) leading to a more informed society. This just hasn't panned out the way the tech utopians of the 90s thought it would. What they failed to foresee is that the abundance of information can lead to just as much ignorance as the lack of information.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
mangeletti 10y ago
I think the problems you're bringing up cannot be solved. Information (re: "Information Superhighway") is information. In this utopian idea of "quality control", who does the quality control? Houghton Mifflin[1]? If history is just a set of lies agreed upon[2], I'd rather have the consensus of the Internet than whoever it is you purport should be in control of quality. 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/09/12/proposed-texas-textbooks-are-inaccurate-biased-and-politicized-new-report-finds/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/09/... 2. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/napoleonbo161968.html http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/napoleonbo161968....
- GrumpyYoungMan 10y ago
  Not necessarily. The key problem is that primary sources are either in non-searchable hardcopy format (books, etc.) or inaccessible behind paywalls, making it impractical to do wide-ranging research outside of the academic libraries maintained by by large universities. It would take quite a major revision to copyright law but it's not impossible to imagine some future version of a library where one can search digitized versions of all known works and correlate between them.
- 10y ago

itp 10y ago

I see what you're getting at. I'm reminded of the discussion and debate around the Rosenhan experiment[0]. That said, I think your analogy isn't quite on point. The noteworthy thing here isn't just that it's possible to lie on the internet -- people have clearly been doing that for a while. What's interesting here is that those lies, while not at the time intended as an experiment, have still demonstrated how perniciously they can become a part of what is becoming our collective memory and record of truth. We already know that our memories are malleable, fuzzy, adaptive, and often downright wrong. It's interesting to see how this relates to the possibility that lies, or untruths, take on a life of their own online, and can serve to mold our own recollections. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment

smcl 10y ago

I don't think "be wary of lies on the Internet" was the message, more "I did a funny thing and the Internet is dumb sometimes" - I was in tears laughing at some of the stupid episode summaries. And the irony that free-for-all Wikipedia was the only accurate source was pretty good too

wtetzner 10y ago
Likely because the people who wrote the Wikipedia article actually watched the episodes or were fans of the show. The other places just copied the information from whatever source they had available, which happened to be from tvtome.com.

coldtea 10y ago

Can't find any fault with the argument. If he did that for fun, tons of others can do it for fan, more with malicious intent, even more for profit, even more than those from idiocy and repeating misinformation, etc.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
And many do. Remember that "I rm -rf'd my production server" story recently, and how it turned out to be a lie? Remember that "school treats a kid as a terrorist because he brought a DIY clock to class" thing that after weeks of media coverage turned out to be a completely different story?
- coldtea 10y ago
  Exactly. Though, about the latter story (kid, clock etc.) I've followed it a little at the time, but what do you mean "turned out to be a completely different story"? From what I know it was like what it was reported from the start. And Obama even called the kid to the whitehouse later. Am I missing some development?

kalleboo 10y ago

If it was just "there are lies on the Internet - I just posted some!" Then yeah. To me this story is more how they propagate. Who knew Netflix didn't get their metadata from the production company itself?

TeMPOraL 10y ago
My guess is that they're filled in by low-paid (or unpaid) interns. I'm especially wary of anything that has even a touch of marketing involved with it. Especially on social media. You know how all those photos with words are made - be it dietary advice or philosophy quotes or whatever? I had some ideas, but wasn't really sure until my SO did an internship with a social media marketing company. It's literally: 1) Google for some keywords on the topic you need, 2) take the first article or blog post that pops up, 3) find a good enough quote or idea on it, 4) pick a random picture from the Internet, 5) stick the two together in Photoshop or Paint.NET, 6) spam the living shit out of all your channels with it. It's that. Zero research. And preferably done by unpaid interns.
jbenz 10y ago
Let's say Netflix asks the production company for the cast. DIC Entertainment went defunct 7 years ago. Let's say they were still around though. Would someone there have to dig through physical filing cabinets? Or would they just google it? Bottom line: Henry Winkler voicing a shark as a meta-jumped-the-shark reference is brilliant.