Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could imagine running multiple different AIs seeing if they agree if something is true. I imagine this is similar to how Twitter's/X's community notes work. Something along the lines of when you have two accounts that disagree traditionally and they agree on something. That's how you know it's likely to be true. So from that approach, you actually want to have two AIs that are on the other side of the spectrum of w…
This is extremely problematic. Much of news is highly syndicated, so what looks like 10 credible sources are actually just 2. I think the best you can aim for is empirical sources: receipts, videos, photo evidence, public disclosures directly at the source. Archiving is ok if disclosed. I don't think LLMs can discern truth when the majority of news sources are incentivized primarily for views.
> Something along the lines of when you have two accounts that disagree traditionally and they agree on something. That's how you know it's likely to be true.
Outfits that blindly parrot talking points would not be at odds and thus not be good candidates.