Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 97 posts

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#41

Post by trasz »

seibelj wrote: post #4

How will this work when reality is partisan? The Hunter Biden laptop story was a debunked conspiracy by the “experts” until it wasn’t, and the recent Chinese election data stolen “conspiracy” (as declared by the NYT) turned out to be true. Yet day after day the stories about Trump and Russia were blasted by major media… until that was totally debunked. It’s like one side decides what is true and the other side is con…

Reality was always partisan like that. The only thing that changed is that now you can see the other ones.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#43

Post by phailhaus »

Alupis wrote: post #32
noahtallen wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the conspiracies didn’t conclude the way you say they do, or at least not completely. As far as I can tell, the current “consensus” is that the Hunter Biden laptop, while real, can’t prove any unethical behavior on the part of the president. And the Russian stuff — while Muller couldn’t prove that Trump asked Russia for help (beyond the video of him asking for it in camera, perhaps as a joke), it is still tru…

I think your post only highlights the points the parent was making - we pick and choose what "facts" we want to believe and then never change our opinion. When these "facts" are debunked days, weeks, months or years later, we just move on and pretend it didn't happen or talk out of the side of our mouth about how there's still some sliver truth there. If it doesn't help our team, then it can't possibly be true. Objec…

> We accused the Trump family of everything the Biden family is objectively involved with... except we had zero evidence against the Trump family (despite years of relentless investigations)

Please, this is absurd. No president has had more of his associates go to jail than Trump [1], and Mueller's investigation found that Trump knew about Russian interference, chose to do nothing since it helped him, and obstructed justice [2]. And now we know that he stole Top Secret/SCI documents from the country [3], and has yet to return all of them [4]. These attempts to make "the Biden crime family" a meme are very weak and fall flat on their face.

[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/all-of-the-trumpworld-figures-...

[2] https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download

[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/22/us/politics/trump-mar-a-l...

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/01/us/politics/trump-white-h...

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#46

Post by Alupis »

phailhaus wrote: post #43
Alupis wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your post only highlights the points the parent was making - we pick and choose what "facts" we want to believe and then never change our opinion. When these "facts" are debunked days, weeks, months or years later, we just move on and pretend it didn't happen or talk out of the side of our mouth about how there's still some sliver truth there. If it doesn't help our team, then it can't possibly be true. Objec…

> We accused the Trump family of everything the Biden family is objectively involved with... except we had zero evidence against the Trump family (despite years of relentless investigations) Please, this is absurd. No president has had more of his associates go to jail than Trump [1], and Mueller's investigation found that Trump knew about Russian interference, chose to do nothing since it helped him, and obstructed…

A few guys going to jail for unpaid taxes decades before does not help your view that the Mueller Investigation was a smashing success. They ruined a bunch of lives for cheap political gain, found zero evidence of collusion with Russia, and proved the insinuation of collusion was fake from the beginning as we now know but won't admit.

You only make this point even stronger.

> And now we know that he stole Top Secret/SCI documents from the country, and has yet to return all of them

This is very much an unfinished story.

But, nothing I say will change your mind, and no real facts coming out will change it either. Which is the point the GP was making... despite reality, we all pretend our team does no wrong.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#47

Post by MichaelCollins »

krapp wrote: post #39
bl_valance wrote: post #35

It really ruins the magic of some (obvious)joke posts when you see a damn fact check box. This "feature" I see it in the same way as warning labels - "Caution: Hot" - treats people as if they can't practice critical thinking and common sense.

> This "feature" I see it in the same way as warning labels - "Caution: Hot" - treats people as if they can't practice critical thinking and common sense. History demonstrates that, for the most part, people can't. Even Hacker News - a community of people who should "know better" - is infested with conspiracy theories, disinformation and bullshit. And the general public trusts Facebook memes more than the mainstream…

Growing up I knew a kid who's leg had been run over by a lawn mower. He still had it, but half his calf was missing and he had horrific scaring. I never saw the lawn mower that chewed his leg up, but I'd bet it had warning stickers on it like all mowers do. Don't stick your fingers in the blades, and certainly don't run over your younger brother with it..

The warning stickers won't fix stupid, but everything dangerous gets warning stickers anyway because lawyers make bank throwing lawsuits around whenever stupid people do stupid things to themselves. The stickers exist for liability reasons, not to protect people. The stickers are magical wards meant to keep the lawyers away.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#48

Post by specialist »

Truthiness is not and has never been the problem. Virality is.

Let the lunatics say whatever they want (within the law). Stop promoting it. Eliminate the algorithmic recommenders (automated hated machines).

If that's not enough, start eliminating the other dopamine hits; remove (or nerf) retweets, likes, and whatever other gamification features there are.

As for "truthiness", the workable alternative to factchecking is authenticity.

Social medias should enable the following:

    share your work
    cite your sources
    sign your name
Bonus points for enabling:

    errata
    retractions
This isn't hard. All the monkey motion about fraud prevention and factchecking only serve to preserve and protect the hate machine.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#49

Post by karaterobot »

> Birdwatch notes only appear on tweets if they’re deemed helpful by people who tend to disagree with each other.

That's kind of an interesting twist on the game mechanic! I really hope it works. I'll continue to not use Twitter either way.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#50

Post by cortesoft »

mattw2121 wrote: post #14

I was recently invited to be a lead on Nextdoor (I know, I know) and accepted so that I could peek behind the curtain. Their process is that any flagged content is voted on by leads to Leave it, Possibly Remove, or Remove. What I've observed is that posts that completely break the rules still have a 50/50 split. My point being that many people are not able to objectively look at something and make a decision. Their o…

> My point being that many people are not able to objectively look at something and make a decision. Their opinions and feelings will always get mixed in.

Isn't the idea that individuals will have biases, but on average they will cancel each other out when aggregated together? I don't think that is necessarily true, but I think it is overly simplistic to say that individuals having biases means the consensus of the crowd can't work.

Post reply on HN