> ConservaSearch Will never work from a mathematical perspective. The most valuable thing that Google ever gave society was a mathematical algorithm for searc

> ConservaSearch Will never work from a mathematical perspective. The most valuable thing that Google ever gave society was a mathematical algorithm for search that then used crowd-sourcing for additional improvement of results. This will never work for propaganda movements because information born from observation tend towards resolution while other kinds of information tend towards bifurcation. In order to describe what I mean, we can look at the scientific process around climate change, where the vast, vast, majority of the scientific community has been able to reach a common conclusion: Humans are causing climate change, and we should probably stop. As more studies and changes occur, this will solidify, although there isn't much further that we can move in support of climate change from the scientific community at this point. On the other end, we can look at groups of faith and see how much different sects of Christianity differ throughout the world, given how they share the same source material. If we were to try to build ConservaPedia today, let's say I downloaded or wrote a similar algorithm to Google, because quality of search is important or nobody will use it, and then try to remove ... objectionable material. Who determines what is objectionable? How do I use the results and clicks of people to move things to the top, to make the search more usable, if the end user cannot test the veracity of the results? Don't the results then only become a total crapshoot? The hands-on approach isn't going to work for long. I imagine that this is why Google is having trouble with attempts to build out for the Chinese market. I don't think that the world of search can ever work effectively with any kind of adherence to dogma. This is why ideological dogma is typical spread in social networks instead, which is a far better way to spread dogmatic memes.