Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wolverine876 860 days ago
The Internet is an absolute disaster; disinformation campaigns are everywhere, drowning people, with endless horrible consequences. Freedom, peace, prosperity, democracy, human rights, health, etc. are all at risk.

Why are we putting up with it? We really need a solution. At this point, I'd love a walled garden where I know I'd get quality information. It doesn't have to be perfect, but not misinformation or disinformation. I'd love a search engine that restricted itself to quality sources.

Even from a purely immediate self-interest perspective, why are all these intelligent people accepting such a trash product?
2 comments
Mountain_Skies 860 days ago
Who do you trust to provide that solution who is above using it to control narratives for their own benefit? And do you think they will forever be trustworthy and/or agree with your world view?
link
wolverine876 860 days ago
It's a theoretical problem, but it's a commonplace practical function. Everything you read was chosen and written by other people. There's no getting around it unless you are doing primary research. I'll have to choose carefully.

For example, if DuckDuckGo offered a 'quality sources' search, I'd pay for it. I don't want to search the entire Internet - that's madness if you think about it. Why are we doing that?

link
Dig1t 860 days ago
misinformation is "false or inaccurate information"

Isn't this the same as asking for a source of information that is always correct? Has that ever actually existed in any form?

What about lying by omission?

It seems like we're all freaking out about something that has always been true: people lie, say half-truths, distort facts. It's pretty hard to convey only information that is 100% provably true and also tells a complete picture.

link
wolverine876 860 days ago
> misinformation is "false or inaccurate information" / Isn't this the same as asking for a source of information that is always correct? Has that ever actually existed in any form?

That's really taking that definition (if that's the precise definition) to a theoretical extreme! And then you say your extreme is impossible. Yes, I agree!

link