An application that will help responsible and skeptical readers filter more effectively the information that floods them on the net.
Keren Maron Galileo
In many cases, when a reporter presents facts and figures decisively and authoritatively, it is hard not to believe him. The chance that we will believe wrong information and even lies increases with the widespread use of the Internet, where anyone can publish articles and present themselves as an expert. This is one of the reasons that movements such as the Birthers movement, which claims (and lies) that the President of the United States was not born in the country he is the leader of, gain much publicity and success.
Now Dr. Rob Ennals (Ennals), a researcher at the Intel Research Laboratory in Berkeley, California, is developing an application that will help responsible and skeptical readers filter more effectively the information that floods them on the web. The software, called Dispute Finder, as its name suggests, marks arguments on the net whose credibility is disputed.
The application, which is still in the initial stages of development, is installed in the "Firefox" browser (currently does not work with other browsers). When a user opens a web page, the application compares each sentence that appears on the page to a pool of potential lies and marks in pink any sentence that may be questionable. The reader can click on the marked text and view a list of arguments from reliable sources that contradict the text. The reader then has to decide for himself if he believes the text on the web page or the counter arguments.
The application builds the pool of potential lies using the "wiki" method, that is, through input from its users. When a user surfing the Internet encounters a sentence that seems to him to be false, he can add this sentence to the Dispute Finder's list of lies and add links to contradictory arguments. This method is not perfect, because it suffers from the same weaknesses that the entire Internet suffers from: if any user can mark any sentence as false, then those with vested interests may abuse this and question any sentence that goes against their worldview or interest.
Enles also tries to solve this problem through input from the users - each user can vote for or against any argument presented to him, thus teaching the software which counter arguments and which sources might convince him personally. Also, users can report "spam" - counter-arguments that are without a doubt false, and these will be completely removed from the argument database.
12 תגובות
If there really is such an application, then only I think that every time you enter Ynet, it will write that the site is a lie
That would be great
What will happen if the websites have stories like science fiction and "every man has wings" true in my opinion but not according to science. Will it be pink?
isit excellent idea
Overall, it's an interesting idea.
In my Hulit books there is "Magid Emet" and the best book, in my opinion, "Beit HaShecha-Holit"
He explains about developing the sense of truth.
Unsurprisingly distinguishing between truth and falsehood
Related to actions and reality and not what people say.
Defining the corporations that are responsible for the major news channels as "reliable sources of information" will only strengthen their control over shaping the news.
And in our small totalitarian country, this could also be abused by the IDF spokesman, who also (according to his testimony and that of news reporters) more or less decides on the coverage of matters related to political propaganda.
If there is still a majority of ignorant people in the world who oppose evolution and accept the illusory "intelligent design" theory, they will now have the support of software that will emphatically state that "intelligent design" is true, while evolution is a lie. Apparently software that is supposed to advance us - will take us back in giant steps.
Question, what do you say about the above video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-8bVEIVUh8
is he real Is there any archeological article regarding the places where the skeletons were found? Or is it a fake in Photoshop?
What a beauty, thanks to the wonderful support we have in the world, soon to say that the Jewish people will be marked as a lie..and Jews are a good people will be marked as a lie while a slave trader, an apartheid state will be marked as the truth..
There is a smarter solution that we built some company in an event called
startup weekend held not long ago at the IBM house in Petah Tikva.
Look at this coverage
http://www.newsgeek.co.il/startup-weekend-israel-updates/
You can see the video under the heading IS/IT.
By the way, they also won the competition by a team of judges from venture capital funds.
Their idea was to rely on reliable sources of information such as the world's leading news content providers.
They have also extended it to checking such and other PISHING links.
Let's say that if you are sent an email pretending to be your bank, by clicking the right button you can check if this link really pretends to be what it is.
The direction is right, there is not a single application today that calls for a reliability check and apparently ideas, as in many cases in the past, are born when they are supposed to arrive. I wonder what will happen.
I didn't understand the logic in that. If anyone does understand, I'd love to hear it.
For example: 20 million people can mark in pink the sentence "In the Land of Israel the Jewish people was born..." from the Declaration of Independence, as a sentence that is a lie, with references to al-Qaeda's claims (let's say), and it will become a lie forever.
Application link:
http://disputefinder.cs.berkeley.edu/
Yeah, sure!
Thanks to the commander of the Belgian Air Force
(clip 3.5 minutes)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7psGj4M1ZI
Of course they will make sure that it does not "pass" software.
There are many more such examples.
The application will basically determine that the majority opinion is always right. Sounds like a pretty stupid application. It is clear that most people do not understand in most fields (in every field there are few who really understand it), on the other hand, if we draw a conclusion from Israel about the whole world, then all people are sure that they understand everything, and therefore will also experience opinions about a lot of things that they do not understand anything about.
It seems to me that this application may well "train" huge amounts of misinformation and unsubstantiated information.
You need to do statistical studies, in which large populations are asked about all kinds of things, to see where the correct answer is found in the scale of opinions, and so the software will know not to take the answer that the majority determines (because the majority does not understand) but the answer that is statistically the most correct. It seems to me that this might improve this application somewhat, although it would still leave it completely unreliable.