The problem with that is that only those die-hards who fully believe anything they're told by a certain group will be the ones supporting it... Hence why "Truth" is a bust except for the Billionaires helping prop it up for their own purposes... In fact, if MSM would stop talking about it, most people would forget it exists...
Did covid teach you nothing? No one has a monopoly on the truth, and the US government is the biggest spreader of disinformation/misinformation on the planet. Ryan's social credit score is a god awful idea. I believe it was Tim Dillion that said Alex Jones got more right about covid then the CDC did.
I see a couple of problems with the "Truth Score":
1) Who decides what is true? Issues like the lab-leak origin of Covid or Hunter Biden's laptop were "Disinformation" for years, until they weren't. How do you avoid suppressing contrarian views?
2) Government interference in deciding what's true. Outside of the U.S. this can be explicit. Within the U.S. the twitter files have demonstrated that many in the government view the 1st amendment as little more than a minor inconvenience to work around.
Because it's you, i'll watch this in good faith. Mind you, if at the end the 'solution' will be something like "let's be good people instead of idiots" - I might get slightly more ironic ;-)
edit: great points and actually (relatively) easy implementable solutions. how do we convince elon that implementing these kind of changes make him look smart.
The first two suggestions are clearly ones that can and should be implemented. Auto generation of PROPOSED community notes is a no-brainer. Copyright owners would love your second suggestion and would almost certainly reward the social networks (e.g., with advertising or other engagement if not revenue sharing).
Truth scoring is pretty subject to abuse as I'm sure campaigns to manipulate them can be constructed rather easily. Certainly, for X the ability to lift a time-based publishing limit is something that they would want to monetize. Didn't they even do that for a while?
If I wasn't retired I'd be interested in driving this area for X or one of the others.
Overall, thanks for thinking like a software engineer on this stuff.
Might be a good plan in theory but too easily abused. The govt is notorious for letting social media do their censoring for them. Be it silencing those who asked relevant questions about our Covid policies or questioning corruption as was detailed in the Biden laptop. I don't want or need either the govt of big tech to tell me what I can or cannot say.
Some people think letting millions of people enter the country illegally is a humanitarian act and others think it's normalizing and enabling criminal activity. Which is "true"?
Some people think supplying Ukraine with weapons is a moral act to fight against the Russian invasion and others think it's irresponsibly funding another foreign war when we're trillions in debt already. Which is "true"?
Which one should be censored? I would say neither. Short of advocating for direct violence against someone, NOTHING should be censored by Big Tech or the govt. If you want to say water isn't wet, that up is down and 2+2=5 then have at it. We as free thinking individuals should be able to make our own judgements, right or wrong.
Interesting. I agree with @natetoth that it might be the end of memes. The one and only meme I've ever done was by taking a screenshot of someone else's watercolour painting. That was wrong, but it was a good meme!
Really the key to this problem is being critical of what is said, who is saying it, is it referenced to an original source AND, most importantly, who profits from the information provided. People are neurologically programed to be attracted to negative information. That is why the news does one hour and 45 minutes of negative news and 5 minutes of good feeling news. (It is a survival mechanism.)
It increases the ratings.
Why do people "rubber neck" at accidents? It isn't because they want to stop and help, but they want to "see" the gore.
The old newspaper adage, "If it bleeds, it leads." is true and profitable.
Could scores be manipulated? Any system can be manipulated.
Yeah but then bad actors will circumvent that by making their own social network to spread their cancerous disinformation…aka “Truth”
The problem with that is that only those die-hards who fully believe anything they're told by a certain group will be the ones supporting it... Hence why "Truth" is a bust except for the Billionaires helping prop it up for their own purposes... In fact, if MSM would stop talking about it, most people would forget it exists...
Did covid teach you nothing? No one has a monopoly on the truth, and the US government is the biggest spreader of disinformation/misinformation on the planet. Ryan's social credit score is a god awful idea. I believe it was Tim Dillion that said Alex Jones got more right about covid then the CDC did.
You are espousing censorship.
I see a couple of problems with the "Truth Score":
1) Who decides what is true? Issues like the lab-leak origin of Covid or Hunter Biden's laptop were "Disinformation" for years, until they weren't. How do you avoid suppressing contrarian views?
2) Government interference in deciding what's true. Outside of the U.S. this can be explicit. Within the U.S. the twitter files have demonstrated that many in the government view the 1st amendment as little more than a minor inconvenience to work around.
Because it's you, i'll watch this in good faith. Mind you, if at the end the 'solution' will be something like "let's be good people instead of idiots" - I might get slightly more ironic ;-)
edit: great points and actually (relatively) easy implementable solutions. how do we convince elon that implementing these kind of changes make him look smart.
The first two suggestions are clearly ones that can and should be implemented. Auto generation of PROPOSED community notes is a no-brainer. Copyright owners would love your second suggestion and would almost certainly reward the social networks (e.g., with advertising or other engagement if not revenue sharing).
Truth scoring is pretty subject to abuse as I'm sure campaigns to manipulate them can be constructed rather easily. Certainly, for X the ability to lift a time-based publishing limit is something that they would want to monetize. Didn't they even do that for a while?
If I wasn't retired I'd be interested in driving this area for X or one of the others.
Overall, thanks for thinking like a software engineer on this stuff.
Might be a good plan in theory but too easily abused. The govt is notorious for letting social media do their censoring for them. Be it silencing those who asked relevant questions about our Covid policies or questioning corruption as was detailed in the Biden laptop. I don't want or need either the govt of big tech to tell me what I can or cannot say.
Some people think letting millions of people enter the country illegally is a humanitarian act and others think it's normalizing and enabling criminal activity. Which is "true"?
Some people think supplying Ukraine with weapons is a moral act to fight against the Russian invasion and others think it's irresponsibly funding another foreign war when we're trillions in debt already. Which is "true"?
Which one should be censored? I would say neither. Short of advocating for direct violence against someone, NOTHING should be censored by Big Tech or the govt. If you want to say water isn't wet, that up is down and 2+2=5 then have at it. We as free thinking individuals should be able to make our own judgements, right or wrong.
Interesting. I agree with @natetoth that it might be the end of memes. The one and only meme I've ever done was by taking a screenshot of someone else's watercolour painting. That was wrong, but it was a good meme!
Really the key to this problem is being critical of what is said, who is saying it, is it referenced to an original source AND, most importantly, who profits from the information provided. People are neurologically programed to be attracted to negative information. That is why the news does one hour and 45 minutes of negative news and 5 minutes of good feeling news. (It is a survival mechanism.)
It increases the ratings.
Why do people "rubber neck" at accidents? It isn't because they want to stop and help, but they want to "see" the gore.
The old newspaper adage, "If it bleeds, it leads." is true and profitable.
Could scores be manipulated? Any system can be manipulated.
It would be a good thing for social media companies to use AI to fight copyright abuse or DIP. However, memes will go extinct if AI gets in the way.
Social Networks run based off of advertising revenue...
They're going to do what makes them money unless Uncle Sam slaps them down for it...
And since many members of Congress probably still can't program a VCR that won't happen anytime soon...
Social media DIP needs to be finally reined in via tech like this. Great Job as usual.
If only social media could be used to fix the problems with SCOTUS and the disinformation coming out of there