4 ms·
This is a great set of examples of this problem. Of course, the offered solution is "hire a bunch of people to check the facts", which seems to be underestimat
by rtpg 10y ago
This is a great set of examples of this problem.
Of course, the offered solution is "hire a bunch of people to check the facts", which seems to be underestimating the scale of this issue for humans, and perhaps overestimating the difficulty of classifying credibility.
Considering that Google's bread and butter is general site credibility, having some "truthiness vector" added into the mix doesn't seem impossible?
Someone might say "why does Google decide who is credible", but they already do this through the search results anyways. They just don't seem to be able to differentiate between something matching a search, and something being factually accurate.
- tbrowbdidnso 10y agoFake news is just a new version of spam sites. They mostly exist to make money or enforce an agenda. People figured out that Google's algorithms could tell when things were generally factually false, unless those things were recent news. This leads me to believe their algorithms largely relied on news as a source of truth. They're going to have to do something about that