5 ms·
Been experimenting with building tools to make fact checking more transparent and reusable for a few years now, this is the latest iteration of that project. Fe
by YazIAm 8y ago
Been experimenting with building tools to make fact checking more transparent and reusable for a few years now, this is the latest iteration of that project. Feedback appreciated!
- robinduckett 8y agoPerhaps I am just being nitpicky, and I have no comments on the content or intent of the site (not my industry / area) but grey/blue text on the night sky blue background with white for emphasis really threw me whilst trying to read the text on the site. It may also have to do with Linux's crappy font rendering but I found it unreasonably hard to look at. In my experience, there are few good colours that remain readable on text, and I personally find serif fonts visually displeasing in most cases, although there are some exceptions (https://www.nytimes.com/ https://www.nytimes.com/) and even then, the light grey on white background is pretty displeasing. I wish you all the best in your endeavour!
- YazIAm 8y agoThe goal is to enable journalists/bloggers to annotate their content with their fact checking. Allowing their readers to audit to and to contribute to the fact checking for themselves. In other words, enabling journalists to "show their work". Thanks for the feedback about the colours, I'll play around with it!
- v_lisivka 8y agoIt doesn't look like "fact checking". It looks like "citation checking". More popular but wrong opinion will take over less popular but correct one. Fact checking need a court like system, with judges. Contact me, if you interested. I have lot of real world experience with that.
- YazIAm 8y agoSo this differs from regular citations in that: 1) only primary sources are accepted 2) the claim and primary source must be verified by a community of fact checkers Definitely happy to chat though, will send you an email!
- Vinnl 8y agoIs the primary idea for journalists to share the checks they did, or to have contributors help them check whether the things they mention are factual? The former is what I'd imagine when I hear "open source fact checking", the latter would be called "crowd-sourced fact checking", I think. Just some feedback that might or might not be useful for your messaging, depending on your goals :)
- oblib 8y agoLooks like you've done great work on this. It's clean and easy to use and I don't necessarily see a huge problem with "noise" diluting the "facts". I certainly appreciate both the goal and work you've done to accomplish it.
- scott_s 8y agoFor this to be useful at scale, you will need to not just design this for good-faith users, but also against bad-faith actors. If this catches on, it will become a target of coordinated disinformation campaigns. Have you been thinking about what to do against that?
- YazIAm 8y agoIndeed, currently all "verified" reviewers are manually vetted. Long term the goal is to have an open reputation score for every fact checker. I'm currently experimenting with different implementations of this, and seeing good promise.
- scott_s 8y agoHow would the open reputation score mitigate bad-faith actors trying to exploit the system? For example, I believe HN has a vote-ring detector, but I think there's also a decent amount of manual intervention from the mods. Amazon's reputation system is under constant attack through a variety of means (paying teams of people for fake reviews, going to the length of having real transactions on Amazon between fake-reviewer and the seller buying the review).