• Activity
  • Votes
  • Comments
  • New
  • All activity
  • Showing only topics with the tag "social media". Back to normal view
    1. Australia's bushfire emergency is being exploited on social media, as misinformation is spread through cyberspace via hundreds of thousands of posts.

      News article: Fires misinformation being spread through social media This includes a prominent local billionaire, Andrew Forrest, who has pledged $70 million for bushfire relief: "I think there's...

      News article: Fires misinformation being spread through social media

      This includes a prominent local billionaire, Andrew Forrest, who has pledged $70 million for bushfire relief: "I think there's a multitude of reasons why the fire extent has bene so devastating. I think a warming planet would be part of that — [but] the biggest part of that is arsonists," he said.

      13 votes
    2. Latest message from Jimmy Wales to the over three hundred thousand people using WT:Social

      Posted by Jimmy Wales: If you see something here - or anywhere - that is useless or in the wrong place, the fastest and easiest thing to do is click 'edit' and remove it. It's perfectly fine to...

      Posted by Jimmy Wales:

      If you see something here - or anywhere - that is useless or in the wrong place, the fastest and easiest thing to do is click 'edit' and remove it.

      It's perfectly fine to even blank something if it's in the wrong place or is spam.

      Sometimes, things only need a little tweaking - removing some bias, fixing a misstatement, etc.

      But sometimes the best thing to do is just... delete it.

      A notable response from Georgi Stankov:

      But what happens if a detractor by purpose deletes the entry of another user? For example, for political reasons. How a user could appeal the deleted post? Who will arbitrate?

      Jimmy Wales' response:

      Geogi - in the wiki world everything is transparent. Someone who does that will quickly be banned. People are quite reasonable as it turns out - the failed philosophy of non-collaborative social media has made it hard to see this fact: most people are basically pretty nice. And yes, we can't be naive and assume everyone is acting in good faith, hence the reason some people get banned.

      32 votes
    3. A novel example of namespace clashing in competition between bots

      Discuss: namespace clashes expose and ensure instabilities in user-side solutions to interface problems. Case in point -- the RemindMeBot, which will send a timed reminder message to anyone who...

      Discuss: namespace clashes expose and ensure instabilities in user-side solutions to interface problems.

      Case in point -- the RemindMeBot, which will send a timed reminder message to anyone who calls it in a reddit comment with the phrase "RemindMe!", has been cloned and iterated upon by another bot, Kzreminderbot, which responds to the exact same trigger phrase. Both bots reply to the comment threads where they are summoned. Kzreminderbot has slightly more diverse features, including email/text notification, but the interesting thing here (I think) is the impotence of the response from the creator of RemindMeBot, who has added a link in their comment replies to send annoyed feedback to the second bot.

      We talk occasionally about the scramble for usernames on new services, but this is an slightly novel example of the cascading hierarchies of website design. A feature which reddit lacked is added by a bot, but that bot is too provisional to cover the hole which it was meant to fill.

      8 votes