posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 07:36 PM
a reply to: burntheships
It's pretty easy to verify facts on your own. I may agree with you in the sense that relying on an database/algothrym/whatever to pronounce truth
sounds a bit hinky but we will have to wait and see how it works.
Will it provide the 'sources' (and for new there should be three independent of one another) for 'certifying' a fact. Will it be available to the
public or, as I imagine, only to those paying a high subscription service fee (i.e. Lexus/Nexus).
Will it be able to parse 'spin' and vernacular?
There are a lot of things to see, before condemning solely on the basis of association.
What I'd rather have - as a public service - is a registry of sources that includes real information about them - their funding, their history of
accuracy and reliability, their purpose (stated and actual). A non-partisan, scientific approach without ideological or religious or other nonsense.
This database, publically funded, would rate varies sources and clearly explain those ratings. Now that would be a service to the world - a wonderful
help in education - only be able to use 'media' sources with a "C" rating or above.
As to this 'fact checking' software, the more I think about it, the less I'm inclined to think it will help anything but still willing to wait and