2 ms·
1) I have provided examples of how adversaries can manipulate the naive implementation described above. Countering one example shouldn't be seen as countering t
by intended 10y ago
1) I have provided examples of how adversaries can manipulate the naive implementation described above. Countering one example shouldn't be seen as countering the class.
2) to answer your specific question - self referential information loops already exist.
News paper makes a claim, claim is put onto Wikipedia. That claim is repeated by other websites, which in then use wikipedia as the source.
How will wiki tribune solve this?
By doing longform research? Going out in the field and finding the facts?
That's not what this setup is good for. It assumes that fact checkers can check facts, at the speed of the current news cycle.
Fact is that this verification can't be done fast enough and broad enough to cover ground to be useful, unless it gets a multi billion dollar investment.
- vinceguidry 10y agoIt doesn't have to solve it perfectly and in every case. But by building a human apparatus it can apply human ingenuity at scale to tackle the problem. Wikipedia mainly fails around the margins. Yes, initially bad actors can game the system. But success brings more attention and eventually the problems are fixed.
- intended 10y agoBut the margins are the issue here, and this is all at the frequency of the news cycle. Take a look at the objections put together at the top of the comment tree on this page. They point out exactly why this won't work. Do consider that this has to happen at the speed of the news cycle! This means that volunteers and journos have to report fast enough to be relevant or helpful. Thats a lot less time for volunteers to fact check or respond.
- vinceguidry 10y agoThe goal does not have to be to ascertain and adjudicate truth. It only has to detect attempts to deceive. Right now we don't have a good way of doing that other than everybody building up their own internal filter. Perfection is the enemy of the good.