Journalists to use 'immune system' software against fake news

FUNDED BY (((GEORGE SOROS))) OF COURSE

Full Fact software backed by George Soros and Pierre Omidyar fact-checks statements in parliament and news media in real time

(1/2)

archive.fo/a20Ln

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/u8ocI
archive.is/nw13v
archive.is/01GGe
web.archive.org/web/20170311110800/https://digiday.com/uk/5-new-automated-fact-checking-projects-underway/
news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14885476
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

(2/2)

Ministry of truth, here we go!

Yeah, it's called rapid response, I've done it myself, but never seen this kind of reputation management used in the fake news industry before.

The trick is to let it run neutral for a few years, let the normies get used to it, then inject (((bias))).

Do you even scheme? Manufacture a controversy or statement that will anger the masses at the truth and have the public clamor for it to be fixed.

Then you can be celebrated for the bias injection and be covered if anything goes wrong later.

Sweet mother of xenu.
Hansard is by its very nature wildly inaccurate.
It is the OFFICIAL parliamentary record and in it nobody uses non-parliamentary language.
Meaning every statement every word uttered is carefully scrutinised and often rewritten to preserve its intent and meaning but remove non-parliamentary language such as the constant verbal sparring between parties.

And the people responsible for it take it very very seriously.
Their work is sacred and beyond the petty machinations of politicians.

So how in the name of fuck did they get coerced into cooperating with such a project?

It's not anyone's gonna use that software. The credibility meme is dead at this point.

I'd LOVE for them to actually make this tool public.

No software is currently able to do something like "fact-checking" - if they had that it would mean they have a piece of software which is not only beating the best currently available tools on the market (stuff like Siri or Cortana), but also fast enough to parse the message and return something that is based on tons of data - all in real time, as they claim. This means that they also have to understand the data they have in a way that lets them return only factual statements (otherwise the whole purpose of such a tool is defeated - why bother if you get gibberish or something that is plain wrong?). You can use all the ML and AI techniques the humanity has currently at it's disposal, you can rent fuckload of servers and you still won't be able to come anywhere near close to that in the year 2017. The fact that they have some kind of a demo doesn't mean jack shit, I've seen demos of such things that didn't even have a functioning system behind it, demos are made to sell the product.

Besides, isn't the whole point of the panic behind the so-called "fake news" that some facts are too close to the actual truth? The very moment the software will declare that 6 gorillion kikes didn't die in the ovens because it's physically impossible they will start messing with the results - and then they will only go even further until it will be clear that the software is not painting the full picture. At this point no one will care anymore, because it's not better than a human anyway.

Oh no, user. The (((media))) is telling me it's alright to microchip my arm to buy cafeteria goods in my (((company))). It is also telling me I don't need to worry about driving cars in the future, because a (((self-driving AI))) will just bring me home. Oh, disregard the fear-mongerers saying you can simply duct tape a sign and it will malfunction, these are just inconveniences!

Be right back, I need to sacrifice my dog because it is a meat-eater that is contributing to (((global warming))). Maybe I'll step by the (((vegan grocery shop))) and buy myself some (((soy))) for my breakfast.