Sometimes I feel he is trolling at large scale. He understands how the game works and use it as a toy. However, under current circumstances the idea to increase accountability of news is a good...
Sometimes I feel he is trolling at large scale. He understands how the game works and use it as a toy. However, under current circumstances the idea to increase accountability of news is a good one even if it is presented in a somehow upsetting way.
All I can see in the future for 'Pravada' is corruption by people who have a lot of money - who will now interfere with politics and altering democracy to favor those who are paying not those who...
All I can see in the future for 'Pravada' is corruption by people who have a lot of money - who will now interfere with politics and altering democracy to favor those who are paying not those who have power.
Example: Mark Zuckerberg paying Pravada to say Cambridge Analytica event and news are all fake news whilst dealing with it privately. In the end it's Pravada that will be profiting to stay alive longer and to mess with the heads of regular people like puppets.
Edit: We wouldn't even know if it really happened cause investigative journalist would need to fight against giants and will most likely be stepped on and swept under the rug. Elon Musk has people favoring him and that is why it scares me that it will most likely become reality and will have supporters fueling it initially so it won't fail.
Edit 2: Lmao now I'm getting paranoid.
The title is a bit misleading as Elon only said he would, which for anyone who knows Elon means there's a 30% chance he maybe follows through, and a 60% chance he definitely follows through. I'm...
The title is a bit misleading as Elon only said he would, which for anyone who knows Elon means there's a 30% chance he maybe follows through, and a 60% chance he definitely follows through.
There's a subtle difference between "Elon Musk will" and "Elon Musk says he will". But, then again, I would have said the same thing when he said he was going to create a tunnel drilling company...
There's a subtle difference between "Elon Musk will" and "Elon Musk says he will". But, then again, I would have said the same thing when he said he was going to create a tunnel drilling company and call it "The Boring Company".
He says that he is "Going to". Not some third party, news outlet or a fan account. He, the man himself, is saying that he is going to do it means he will do it. I don't care about percentage he...
He says that he is "Going to". Not some third party, news outlet or a fan account. He, the man himself, is saying that he is going to do it means he will do it. I don't care about percentage he keeps his word or not. Don't add words to a news by yourself. This is one of the reasons I feel that if he made the site it would be helpful but there's so much bad that I can see that might happen if it's made that it scares me. :S
I've read a lot of articles with click-baity titles that talk about Tesla's Autopilot but none that I have read ever blame Tesla. They just lay out the facts that they know, then people...
I've read a lot of articles with click-baity titles that talk about Tesla's Autopilot but none that I have read ever blame Tesla. They just lay out the facts that they know, then people extrapolate wildly. If this is going to ever be trustworthy it shouldn't be run by a person who has an agenda, to portray Tesla vehicles better.
According to his tweet, the rating won't be decided by one person with an agenda: That's good enough. IMHO Tilde should have this rating system to score sources.
According to his tweet, the rating won't be decided by one person with an agenda:
where the public can rate the core truth of any article & track the credibility score over time of each journalist, editor & publication.
That's good enough.
IMHO Tilde should have this rating system to score sources.
I don't think that is good enough. You have a sizable portion of the American population that believes what Alex Jones says is true. They believe that Sean Hannity is a credible reporter even...
I don't think that is good enough. You have a sizable portion of the American population that believes what Alex Jones says is true. They believe that Sean Hannity is a credible reporter even though he is an entertainer. You're going to get people that vote on their political agenda rather than the facts. You'd get fox "news" reporters with mixed credibility and you'd get CNN reporters with mixed credibility. You'd even have some PBS reporters who are the most neutral reporters on this planet with mixed scores because some people don't like their political agenda being challenged with the truth.
I'd be satisfied with academics and/or distinguished journalists to be the ones who set the bar. And if you want people to vote, sure it could be set up like the rotten tomatoes voting system. The approved raters would have their own overarching score while the people would have a separate one.
Letting journalists audits their own is never a good way to measure credibility. Furthermore, argument from authority is a terrible way to argue for it. Just because you're a...
I'd be satisfied with academics and/or distinguished journalists to be the ones who set the bar.
Letting journalists audits their own is never a good way to measure credibility. Furthermore, argument from authority is a terrible way to argue for it. Just because you're a journalist/distinguished/academics doesn't mean you got it right.
Sometimes I feel he is trolling at large scale. He understands how the game works and use it as a toy. However, under current circumstances the idea to increase accountability of news is a good one even if it is presented in a somehow upsetting way.
All I can see in the future for 'Pravada' is corruption by people who have a lot of money - who will now interfere with politics and altering democracy to favor those who are paying not those who have power.
Example: Mark Zuckerberg paying Pravada to say Cambridge Analytica event and news are all fake news whilst dealing with it privately. In the end it's Pravada that will be profiting to stay alive longer and to mess with the heads of regular people like puppets.
Edit: We wouldn't even know if it really happened cause investigative journalist would need to fight against giants and will most likely be stepped on and swept under the rug. Elon Musk has people favoring him and that is why it scares me that it will most likely become reality and will have supporters fueling it initially so it won't fail.
Edit 2: Lmao now I'm getting paranoid.
More about the name 'Pravada' (Russian newspaper): http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tweets-what-does-pravda-mean-2018-5
The title is a bit misleading as Elon only said he would, which for anyone who knows Elon means there's a 30% chance he maybe follows through, and a 60% chance he definitely follows through.
I'm hopeful that he sits down with Kara Swisher at CODE next week and talks about this.
Not misleading at all. Elon tweeted: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/999367582271422464
"Going to create a site.... "
There's a subtle difference between "Elon Musk will" and "Elon Musk says he will". But, then again, I would have said the same thing when he said he was going to create a tunnel drilling company and call it "The Boring Company".
I never thought he'd sell flamethrowers though, oh no siree bob
He says that he is "Going to". Not some third party, news outlet or a fan account. He, the man himself, is saying that he is going to do it means he will do it. I don't care about percentage he keeps his word or not. Don't add words to a news by yourself. This is one of the reasons I feel that if he made the site it would be helpful but there's so much bad that I can see that might happen if it's made that it scares me. :S
I've read a lot of articles with click-baity titles that talk about Tesla's Autopilot but none that I have read ever blame Tesla. They just lay out the facts that they know, then people extrapolate wildly. If this is going to ever be trustworthy it shouldn't be run by a person who has an agenda, to portray Tesla vehicles better.
According to his tweet, the rating won't be decided by one person with an agenda:
That's good enough.
IMHO Tilde should have this rating system to score sources.
I don't think that is good enough. You have a sizable portion of the American population that believes what Alex Jones says is true. They believe that Sean Hannity is a credible reporter even though he is an entertainer. You're going to get people that vote on their political agenda rather than the facts. You'd get fox "news" reporters with mixed credibility and you'd get CNN reporters with mixed credibility. You'd even have some PBS reporters who are the most neutral reporters on this planet with mixed scores because some people don't like their political agenda being challenged with the truth.
I'd be satisfied with academics and/or distinguished journalists to be the ones who set the bar. And if you want people to vote, sure it could be set up like the rotten tomatoes voting system. The approved raters would have their own overarching score while the people would have a separate one.
Letting journalists audits their own is never a good way to measure credibility. Furthermore, argument from authority is a terrible way to argue for it. Just because you're a journalist/distinguished/academics doesn't mean you got it right.
OMG YES! I hope the Tildes devs are taking notes from his tweets. @Deimos