> Except for the "tools to amplify factual voices"
They felt the need to include it, if they didn't I would agree with what they are trying to do. Why do they need to launder that line item with the rest?
Many people prefer facts over the lies, propaganda, misrepresentations, exaggerations, cheats, scams, accusations, and other FUD promulgated by some of the media and many agencies, politicians and advertisers. They're not that hard to discern, for adults at least.
This move seems to fit right in with the rest of Mozilla's program.Seems like a good move ... and the majority of people on the Fediverse seem likely to agree.
Adults disagree on many things and are willing to kill each over those disagreements in some cases, even when it comes to what the "truth" is. So color me quite skeptical that any tool that anyone uses is going to be free from such biases unless it's solely in the domain of verifying mathematical correctness in some strictly defined ontological system.
The whole idea of universal 'Truth' is a big part of most of our problems, yes. As the pre-Platonic Protagoras tried to assert, we need to temper our judgements by recognizing that different perspectives lead to relatively different conclusions.
Facts that all can observe and agree on are the basis of tolerance of interpretations we can't agree on. For millenia, some have insisted that they have been gifted with some ultimate truths. Nonsense. So yes, agreed-on, observed facts are the basis what we need more of, with other sorts of assertions carrying much less weight.
This move seems to fit right in with the rest of Mozilla's program.Seems like a good move ... and the majority of people on the Fediverse seem likely to agree.