I'm imagining a alternate version of git where you do `git log` or some such other subcommand, and the output comes from the aggregate of every local clone that

I'm imagining a alternate version of git where you do `git log` or some such other subcommand, and the output comes from the aggregate of every local clone that has ever existed. So someone writes an alarming story that 68% of the kernel code is in such a broken state it actually doesn't even compile correctly. Ok, but what would that mean for such a weirdo, broken piece of software? That most users download, tinker, get frustrated and never come back? That Linus is incompetent? That there's one troll out there continually cloning master and breaking it to write a story about? That there's N such trolls? To me, the only information to glean from that would be that this alt-git would be a massive pile of garbage. The difference with Facebook is that its userbase doesn't have the competency or necessary source/data access to, say, leverage a hash to grab the goods and fork the thing into a non-stupid, workable piece of software. A non-negligible number of their users keep using it as a source of news. The Qanon bullshit is basically a pentest that shows the content of this headline could literally be anything at all when it comes to Facebook. It'd be absurd to spend time discussing what exactly it is about Tom Hanks that makes people think he eats babies. The topic should be how the hell we are going to stop FAANG from enumerating through every socially destructive set of lucrative dark patterns before this stops. Edit: clarification