geekwithsoul @ geekwithsoul @lemm.ee

I coalesce the vapors of human experience into a viable and meaningful comp

---

Read more

Posts

27

Comments

596

Joined

2 yr. ago

I don’t believe anyone else will do it, but based on the article, I couldn’t help but be a bit cheeky this once.

With a tip of the keyboard to a certain someone who has blocked me and won't see this (a shame really):

Since many in this community have a habit of resorting to personal attacks when responding to posts recently, I’ll say this: I support and respect everyone’s right to vote for who they want to. Just as I support the ability of anyone to point out to someone the consequences of their actions. ;)

I’m just posting this article that’s already available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy—I didn’t write it, just sharing it for discussion.

“…insinuating that only bots are down voting…” (emphasis added)

No, they’re not saying “only”, they’re saying there may be bots doing some of the downvoting. E.g. probably based off IPs, client strings, or something else.

That’s not what he was saying.

Yeah, go see his response in another part of this thread to my request to provide some constructive feedback if you haven’t already. It was all just the same bad faith misinformation about the bot and the data source. I even linked the sources for how it actually worked and no reply, just downvotes.

Currently the bot's media ratings come from just some guy, who is unaccountable and has an obvious rightwing bias.

Wow! Talk about misinformation!!! https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/about/

Or maybe you think they were bought and paid for by some nefarious source? Nope…

Media Bias/Fact Check funding comes from reader donations, third-party advertising, and membership subscriptions. We use third-party advertising to prevent influence and bias, as we do not select the ads you see displayed. Ads are generated based on your search history, cookies, and the current web page content you are viewing. We receive $0 from corporations, foundations, organizations, wealthy investors, or advocacy groups. See details on funding.

…I would suggest making the ratings instead come from an open sourced and crowdsourced system. A system where everyone could give their inputs and have transparency, similar to an upvote/downvote system.

Such a system would take many hours to design and maintain, it is not something I personally am willing to contribute, nor would I ask it of any volunteers.

Thank you for at least providing an iota of something constructive. It’s an interesting idea, and there is academic research that shows it might be possible. But the problem is then in a world already filled with state- and corpo-sponsored organized misinformation campaigns, how does any crowdsourced solution avoid capture and infiltration from the very sources of misinformation it should be assessing? Look at the feature on Twitter and how often that is abused. Then you’d need a fact checker for your fact checker.

“universally destructive to understanding”

So what you’re saying is that no one derives any use from the bot? Wow, with that kind of omniscience, I’d expect we could just ask you to judge every news source. Win-win for everyone I suppose if you’re up for it.

Now “generally destructive” would probably be better wording for us mere mortals, but stills seems to be a wildly generalized statement. Or maybe “inadequately precise” would be more realistic, but then that really takes the wind out of the sails to ban it, doesn’t?

Because this is the first thing I think I’ve seen you post and blocking everything you disagree with seems sort of stupid?

I think the bot has issues, but I hardly agree that it’s posting misinformation. Incomplete? Imperfect? You bet. But that’s not “misinformation” in any commonly understood meaning. I think the intent of providing additional context on information sources is laudable.

As someone with such a distaste for misinformation, how would you suggest fixing it? That’s a much more useful discussion than “BAN THE THING I PERSONALLY AND SUBJECTIVELY THINK IS BAD!!!!” You obviously think misinformation is a problem, so why not suggest a solution?

Just block it if you don’t like it?

Wouldn’t be surprised if he replaced Vance with RFK Jr now as that would kill discussion of the debate.

Wow, Trump is having a really bad day.

It’s delightful.

With the invasion of Ukraine, there’s been a big push in the US to produce to help stabilize global energy prices.

Username …doesn’t check out

I mean, kinda yeah?

This is what it appears like to me if it helps

Dude - you replied to the Media Bias Fact Check bot, not a human.

https://lemmy.world/u/MediaBiasFactChecker

Is this satire? You’re having a conversation with an automated bot account?

Why does that sound like the voice of experience?

From the article I linked with the item in the context of other finds at the same site…

Evidently it really was probably a cucumber? http://artisticlicenseorwhyitrustnoone.blogspot.com/2022/11/bullshit-memes-8-ancient-egyptian.html?m=1

tl;dr - was found with other model food, probably meant to sustain someone in the afterlife