2 ms·
On the contrary, it often takes more effort to identify and call out bullshit* than it does to create it, so I think this is noble work (at least in theory - of
by sixhobbits 3y ago
On the contrary, it often takes more effort to identify and call out bullshit* than it does to create it, so I think this is noble work (at least in theory - of course the "call out" could also be bullshit).
*in the technical sense popularised by https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit
- duxup 3y agoIt’s a lot of typing but I really don’t see a huge amount of effort in the reviews of the news articles on that site. Once in a while they provide a better article but mostly they just quote chunks of text and say they are wrong. That doesn’t strike me as a lot of effort. It’s their site they can do what they wish, more or less effort. I don’t doubt countering bs can be huge amount of work, but I’m not sure that site and the Wikipedia idea are quite the same.
- oh_sigh 3y agoExcept ML isn't bullshit. The proof is in the pudding. Yes, some people may overhype the positives of it, and maybe it is just my bubble, but I see far more people overhyping the negatives of it. Having a balanced approach to calling out overhyping in both directions would lend more credibility to their organization. Currently they just look like 21st century luddites.