[nradov]

Most "facts" aren't provable in the mathematical sense. We're pretty sure that smoking increases the risk of lung cancer based on extensive research but it's never been 100% proven. So, is it a "fact" that smoking causes cancer? That depends on the level of evidence required and who does the evaluation.

Fake news and false rumors are as old as humanity. They are not a problem that needs to be solved, and we certainly don't need governments or media executives acting as arbiters of truth.

That said, the Twitter/X Community Notes feature seems to be working well. It has been refreshing to see (mostly) false claims by prominent public figures debunked.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/biden-clai...

[ordu]

> Most "facts" aren't provable in the mathematical sense.

Mathematics is not applicable to reality by itself. Math can be a tool among others to deal with truths and lies, but it is useless by itself.

> Fake news and false rumors are as old as humanity. They are not a problem that needs to be solved

Why do you think so?

Firstly there is a non sequitur: from "X is old and was not a problem" doesn't follow that "X is not a problem now". Burning coal was not a problem, but it is a big problem now.

Secondly, why do you think that they are not a problem to solve? There are agents that weaponize rumors and fake news. I see no obvious ways to reason, that they will fail inevitably, that we need just wait and watch how they will fail. But if you see a way to prove it (in any meaning of a proof, not necessarily in mathematical one), I'd like to hear it.

> we certainly don't need governments or media executives acting as arbiters of truth.

Are you proposing a radical change on how a democracy works? Any democracy has courts that act as arbiters of truths. Democracy cannot exist without these arbiters. Democracy has parliaments, congresses and suchlike to decide on what is a best way to tackle the current problems. These authorities are also acting as arbiters of truth in some sense.

I believe you want to say, that we cannot trust governments to run uncontrolled, and yes, we cannot. But the problem of limiting powers of governments is an old problem, it has solutions in some specific cases. So now we need to figure out how to control fake news without giving governments too many powers. It will not be easy, but we cannot say it is impossible before we tried.

[JKCalhoun]

> So, is it a "fact" that smoking causes cancer?

I could be wrong, but I think we're discussing when someone posts something like, "Smoking does not cause cancer."

That's very different.

[throw0101c]

> Most "facts" aren't provable in the mathematical sense.

How about a child sex ring happening in the basement of a pizza joint that has no basement?

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory

[mc32]

“He ducked in to a 7-11 and came out three minutes later with a beer.”

No, your honor, actually, I ducked in to a Quick Mart and came back out two minutes later with a perry. So that is absolutely false.

Are members of Congress clients of prostitute (sorry escorts)? Most likely. Have any engaged in statutory rape? Likely given what we know about the Epsteins. Does that translate into that conspiracy? No. But the worst is now DC points out the ridiculousness of that conspiracy to boohoo the likelihood that some members of Congress and their staff engage in below board activities.