Elon Musk is a nice chap

[dave j]

That's the point of Zero999 isn't it?
Lab leak? It was rejected without any valid reason. And it's no surprise that the US senate has now concluded that it was actually the most likely event.

https://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/report_an_analysis_of_the_origins_of_covid-19_102722.pdf

Yeah.

The US Senate haven't concluded that. The Republicans on a committee have released an interim report claiming it was most likely a lab leak but that's not a final report from the full committee and as a result is not the position of the US Senate. The American Society of Microbiology doesn't believe there is enough evidence to support the report's conclusions and Science magazine is similarly sceptical. So the jury is still out on the origins even if some Republicans have announced a (political timing convenient) conclusion.

[Psi]

Then new bots will be made to Up/downvote.
And more bots to upvote the bots voting 

The only way is the medieval method: Put liars into cages, let them dry at the sun until the body parts fall off.
Being spanish I know what I'm talking about

Stage 1: Figure out a way to prevent bot/dup accounts through some sort of authentication to a real person
Stage 2: Implement a system where people can police themselves, where factually correct posts and people are automatically promoted more.

[james_s]

Stage 2: Implement a system where people can police themselves, where factually correct posts and people are automatically promoted more.

I think there's going to be a broad gray area where "factually correct" depends on who you ask. I'm not really sure what the best way to handle that is, but I think having a diverse panel to judge flagged posts is a reasonable starting point. Even so they are going to have to rely very heavily on automation, they can't possibly have a human staff review millions of posts.

[vad]

So the jury is still out on the origins

Although this does not stop people from labeling the lab origin hypothesis a conspiracy theory.

[vad]

Here is a link to a recent preprint that aligns with the Senate Committee’s report: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.18.512756v1

[Psi]

Stage 2: Implement a system where people can police themselves, where factually correct posts and people are automatically promoted more.

I think there's going to be a broad gray area where "factually correct" depends on who you ask. I'm not really sure what the best way to handle that is, but I think having a diverse panel to judge flagged posts is a reasonable starting point. Even so they are going to have to rely very heavily on automation, they can't possibly have a human staff review millions of posts.

You only have to pre-judge a very small number of popular posts and then watch users like/dislike that post to figure out which users have more or less common sense than others.

[Halcyon]

In the knowledge that this forum never seems to want to delete threads, I’ve change the title to reflect my opinion change over the last month or so. I’m not going to sit here and “Justify” or “Validate“ why I changed  my mind, but let’s just say that I think Elon musk is a very nice chap, and I hugely misjudged him, and the fact that he is very very anti-left liberal woke… That’s enough for me to like him.

Hats off to you for changing your mind about something. Many (most?) people are too stubborn to look past their own preconceived opinions about something/someone.

Also we don't tend to delete topics as it's just another thing for mods to do and it tends to disrupt discussion that has already occurred.

[PlainName]

Stage 2: Implement a system where people can police themselves, where factually correct posts and people are automatically promoted more.

I don't think that would make any difference. People believe what they want to believe, and if some source says they are wrong they just don't trust that source any more.

A few moments ago I caught a Panorama episode about the UK's version of Alex Jones, Richard Hall:

The UK terror survivors tracked down by ‘disaster trolls’

Title pretty much explains it.

Mr Hall suggests that those who were killed in the attack are really alive and living abroad. He also promotes theories that several other UK terror attacks were staged. A former engineer and website designer, he makes money from selling books and DVDs outlining his theories, as well as speaking at events and posting videos online. As recently as mid-October, he had more than 16 million views and 80,000 subscribers on YouTube.

The problem is that these online conspiracy theories result in offline real problems. A survey of 4000 representative people, referenced in the program (and for which a link is given) suggests almost one in five don't believe that "terror survivors are not telling the truth about what happened to them". And "[a] third say the pandemic has made them more suspicious of official explanations of UK terror attacks."

This kind of thing went on before, but the spread of the conspiracy theories was limited by people buying books. Apart from the restricted reach, a book typically bands on about something some time ago. Social medai is very different in that not only does it have massive reach, these things are actively promoted to users. And they are much more current, if not actually live.

I don't think any amount of po-faced rubbishing will deal with people like Alex Jones and his followers because people believe the personalities, not the facts. QAnon was hysterically over the top but January 6th is the kind of result that happens from people wanting to believe rather than exercising their critical faculties. Flagging such stuff as 'not right' just makes them believe more.

And we've not even covered groups gaming the system for the lolz.

[Ed.Kloonk]

The thing is though, in the case of AJ if you use a broad brush and compare the messaging with the arsehats on TV also telling their hooked fans that we're gonna die, there's not alot of difference really. People watch the news and can believe that something said is true when it bloodywell isn't. It's orders of magnitude more than the number AJ pontificates to.

Those on twitter who have a problem with AJ, yet still aren't motivated enough to hold the more pervasive rubbish to account are real shit stains.

[Psi]

Stage 2: Implement a system where people can police themselves, where factually correct posts and people are automatically promoted more.

I don't think that would make any difference. People believe what they want to believe, and if some source says they are wrong they just don't trust that source any more.

It's not really about trying to force everyone on the platform to post accurate and non-fake content or believe something is true/fake. There will always be people posting lies or fake crap and you can't stop that.  It's more about keeping the balance correct so if, for example, 5% of users actually believe in free energy and push it hard on the platform. Then it should seem to everyone else that around 5% of users on the platform believe in free energy, not 50%.  5% of people pushing their view hard shouldn't make it seem like more people believe in it than actually do.

People need to be free to see what others believe and make their own decisions, but if what they see does not reflect reality that is when you get problems.

[magic]

It's more about keeping the balance so that if, for example, 5% of users actually believe in free energy and push it on the platform. Then it should seem to everyone else that around 5% of users on the platform believe in free energy, not 50%.

So go to twatter and make an effort to post about your support for your alternative paid energy theory.
Demonstrate your latest DIY paid energy generator which burns more $$ in fuel than the $$ of electricity it produces.
Show your infographics, anything tangible for all those "beliefs" you allegedly hold.

The sheeple never bother, they live to consume, and they complain if you feed them something they haven't seen on TV.
 

[EEVblog]

Also we don't tend to delete topics as it's just another thing for mods to do and it tends to disrupt discussion that has already occurred.

This is a community technical discussion forum, it's against the ethos of the community to delete posts, let alone entire topics.

[EEVblog]

I don't think that would make any difference. People believe what they want to believe, and if some source says they are wrong they just don't trust that source any more.

I got taken to task a few weeks back on Twitter for posting a link to a news article that was on a website that they didn't like. Those who follow me there might know who and what 
Wasn't enough that the article was backed up other news sources that they trust that I linked to, or that I posted independent metrics to show how the source they were complaining about wasn't as bad as they thought. It was the act of posting anything from that news site that they found objectionable.

[EEVblog]

Stage 2: Implement a system where people can police themselves, where factually correct posts and people are automatically promoted more.

Having the ability for the OP to Pin a post to the top would be a great start.

[EEVblog]

Bots? The real problem are the idiots, they share and spread every crap they find out.
During the pandemic, it wasn't bots those spreading hoaxes when I still had Facebook 

During the pandemic, the truth wasn't known and the accepted consensus changed widely. What was once dismissed as a conspiracy theory, later became accepted as a possibility and the authorities widely spread misinformation and overstated the certainty of the consensus.

Yes it was, and that was the problem. The "truth" in this case was whatever the powers that be said it was at the time. You were literally banned from Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, and every other place, or even fired from you job for daring to question this "truth". You, and even credible scientists in the field weren't even allowed to discuss it in many cases. Youtube literally had (and still have) a public policy of promoting (even domonstrably incorrect) "authoritative sources", and demoting independent news. Iron fisted fear ruled the land, backed by government decree. It's only when fear slowy dissipated and many people had egg on their faces did the platforms stop banning people, you could literally feel the pressure cooker being turned down over the last 6 months.
If these platforms had not bowed to extreme sociital and government pressure to ban people then a lot of things would have been very different.

[RJSV]

   I took at look at the 'Leadership', in examination of the field:
   In the U.S. I listened with the TV news while the topic was 'fixing or upgrading old infrastructure'.  Well, when the program narrator brought on the federal administrator, in shadow of an aging (metal girder bridge), the U.S. 'Head' of transportation systems says;

   " I think, first, we need to replace all those RUSTY PIPES...".
   Incompetence, straight up ignorance of mechanical structure.  Mis-identifying major structural components, with off-hand term 'pipes'.  Fairly likely not qualified, to be Transportation Secretary, of a big country.

[Zero999]

Bots? The real problem are the idiots, they share and spread every crap they find out.
During the pandemic, it wasn't bots those spreading hoaxes when I still had Facebook 

During the pandemic, the truth wasn't known and the accepted consensus changed widely. What was once dismissed as a conspiracy theory, later became accepted as a possibility and the authorities widely spread misinformation and overstated the certainty of the consensus.

Yes it was, and that was the problem. The "truth" in this case was whatever the powers that be said it was at the time. You were literally banned from Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, and every other place, or even fired from you job for daring to question this "truth". You, and even credible scientists in the field weren't even allowed to discuss it in many cases. Youtube literally had (and still have) a public policy of promoting (even domonstrably incorrect) "authoritative sources", and demoting independent news. Iron fisted fear ruled the land, backed by government decree. It's only when fear slowy dissipated and many people had egg on their faces did the platforms stop banning people, you could literally feel the pressure cooker being turned down over the last 6 months.
If these platforms had not bowed to extreme sociital and government pressure to ban people then a lot of things would have been very different.

Exactly. I wanted to avoid discussion of the details, because it's a against the rules. Is it because you're worried about this site being closed down, or just you don't want it flooded with COVID threads? I've always presumed the latter.

A lot more is coming to the surface. Unfortunately I doubt we'll eve know the true story and I'm sceptical our governments will learn anything.

[EEVblog]

Bots? The real problem are the idiots, they share and spread every crap they find out.
During the pandemic, it wasn't bots those spreading hoaxes when I still had Facebook 

During the pandemic, the truth wasn't known and the accepted consensus changed widely. What was once dismissed as a conspiracy theory, later became accepted as a possibility and the authorities widely spread misinformation and overstated the certainty of the consensus.

Yes it was, and that was the problem. The "truth" in this case was whatever the powers that be said it was at the time. You were literally banned from Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, and every other place, or even fired from you job for daring to question this "truth". You, and even credible scientists in the field weren't even allowed to discuss it in many cases. Youtube literally had (and still have) a public policy of promoting (even domonstrably incorrect) "authoritative sources", and demoting independent news. Iron fisted fear ruled the land, backed by government decree. It's only when fear slowy dissipated and many people had egg on their faces did the platforms stop banning people, you could literally feel the pressure cooker being turned down over the last 6 months.
If these platforms had not bowed to extreme sociital and government pressure to ban people then a lot of things would have been very different.

Exactly. I wanted to avoid discussion of the details, because it's a against the rules. Is it because you're worried about this site being closed down, or just you don't want it flooded with COVID threads? I've always presumed the latter.

Yes, the latter. Just like we don't allow religion, guns etc discussions.
There were zero fears of having the site shut down because of "misinformation".

[nctnico]

Bots? The real problem are the idiots, they share and spread every crap they find out.
During the pandemic, it wasn't bots those spreading hoaxes when I still had Facebook 

During the pandemic, the truth wasn't known and the accepted consensus changed widely. What was once dismissed as a conspiracy theory, later became accepted as a possibility and the authorities widely spread misinformation and overstated the certainty of the consensus.

Yes it was, and that was the problem. The "truth" in this case was whatever the powers that be said it was at the time. You were literally banned from Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, and every other place, or even fired from you job for daring to question this "truth". You, and even credible scientists in the field weren't even allowed to discuss it in many cases.

Well, the problem with scientists is that each and every one has their own opinion. Don't forget science is truth by concensus so you'll need to have a whole bunch of scientists to actually agree on something to get close to something that resembles the truth. IOW: a single scientist is just another talking head spouting her/his own opinion which may not even be backed by proper research. Heck, there are many of examples where 'credible' scientists turned out to be producing fake reports just to get another paycheck. You have to make sure you are not following a false prophet.

So yes, it was necessary to clamp down on misinformation and just let people hanging without knowing what to do exactly. Sometimes no information is better than the wrong information. I totally get that many people demanded answers but one of the lessons to be learned from the Covid pandemic is that sometimes you just have to wait for good, well founded answers that tell you what to do without needing to filter through oodles of FUD.

[nctnico]

Bots? The real problem are the idiots, they share and spread every crap they find out.

True. I don't think anything will change on Twitter other than more accounts getting blocked due to spreading false information. EU regulations will likely have a large part in that. In the end twitter is a commercial business that runs on advertising. Advertising makes money. 'Truth' in what shape of form doesn't pay the bills.

[RJSV]

Thanks Floobydust:
   I'm one of those, full of technology thoughts, and reading / viewing habits.  Not so practical.  In married life, I'm better to 'hand over' the paychecks to the wife; she does the common sense, I do the 'extraordinary'...(there goes the EGO, again...)
   I've seen cases where an engineer had exploited that NERD dynamic, even to wearing slightly weird clothes (green pants / brown shirt, every day).  Having ultra-thin toothpick arms helps the 'over-night' programmer image.
   But it's an interesting take, on leaders...having borderline conditions, but yet highly productive.

[DavidAlfa]

Do you remember a scientific from US who got arrested during the pandemic for theft of trade secrets?
Well, that was it.
Was it?
Except for a BS site saying he worked at a biological lab and he was arrested for taking the corona out and selling it to China.
You had to search this very specific terms to find that site.
Except in Facebook, where people started to spread it like there was no tomorrow.
Add the fact people were buying toilet paper for 10 years, what to think?
My theory is we're lacking natural selection, idiots are (mostly) surviving, except those literally getting ran over by their own cars while doing some tiktok crap (Darwin awards).

I guess we peaked at evolution, time to make healing uranium pills again.

[magic]

Truth is overrated.

People think that it exists.
People think that it matters.
People think that it's known.
People think that others care.
People think that others would behave rationally if they knew.
People even think that they behave rationally.

It's basically another tool of politics today. Certainly no one is going to respect it under such conditions.
I blame Americans and their countless, mindless minions around the world.

On the upside, the flames are fun to watch if you distance yourself from the drama

[Wallace Gasiewicz]

I guess we peaked at evolution, time to make healing uranium pills again.

I'm with Devo here, the only rock group I know of with a "Philosophy" other than sex, drugs and whatever....

There message was that humanity had reached a high point of evolution and the the populace was De Evolving, hence the name of their band.

[Zero999]

Bots? The real problem are the idiots, they share and spread every crap they find out.
During the pandemic, it wasn't bots those spreading hoaxes when I still had Facebook 

During the pandemic, the truth wasn't known and the accepted consensus changed widely. What was once dismissed as a conspiracy theory, later became accepted as a possibility and the authorities widely spread misinformation and overstated the certainty of the consensus.

Yes it was, and that was the problem. The "truth" in this case was whatever the powers that be said it was at the time. You were literally banned from Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, and every other place, or even fired from you job for daring to question this "truth". You, and even credible scientists in the field weren't even allowed to discuss it in many cases.

Well, the problem with scientists is that each and every one has their own opinion. Don't forget science is truth by concensus so you'll need to have a whole bunch of scientists to actually agree on something to get close to something that resembles the truth. IOW: a single scientist is just another talking head spouting her/his own opinion which may not even be backed by proper research. Heck, there are many of examples where 'credible' scientists turned out to be producing fake reports just to get another paycheck. You have to make sure you are not following a false prophet.

Plenty of doctors and scientists were censored for having an opinion which countered that of the authorities.

So yes, it was necessary to clamp down on misinformation and just let people hanging without knowing what to do exactly. Sometimes no information is better than the wrong information. I totally get that many people demanded answers but one of the lessons to be learned from the Covid pandemic is that sometimes you just have to wait for good, well founded answers that tell you what to do without needing to filter through oodles of FUD.

Then perhaps governments should have done nothing, rather than basing their decisions on guesses, which they claimed to be certain of at the time and were later found out to be wrong?

Why is misinformation pushed by the authorities any better than, that spouted by some quack on twitter? The only difference is the former was accepted, yet the latter censored.