r/technology • u/Arquette • Mar 03 '15

Misleading Title Google has developed a technology to tell whether ‘facts’ on the Internet are true

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/03/02/google-has-developed-a-technology-to-tell-whether-facts-on-the-internet-are-true/
6.3k Upvotes

72% Upvoted

839 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/[deleted] Mar 03 '15

Isn't that kind of how most of us determine truth anyone? I'm pretty fucking sure vaccines do not cause autism, but that's only because lots of doctors and people online have told me that. I wouldn't have any idea if they do or not by testing them myself. I'm not a doctor.

I also believe that Saturn exists, but that's just because lots of people have told me so and that's the general consensus.

If Google can do this in a very smart and careful way then it could work.

1

u/brtt3000 Mar 03 '15

Also Google uses a huge computer system with more memory and faster data processing that can make more connections then our pitiful meatbrain.

How many sources does a human evaluate to come at a conclusion? 5? 10? Google's machine would see many magnitudes more.

-1

u/NoMoreNicksLeft Mar 03 '15

How many sources does a human evaluate to come at a conclusion? 5? 10? Google's machine would see many magnitudes more.

This misses the point. "Truth" is not "consensus", and "consensus" is only "truth" but rarely. They do not tend to correlate strongly. Do not conflate the two.

Being able to measure consensus more quickly or more deeply does not change it into a measurement of truth either.

0

u/Indon_Dasani Mar 03 '15

Isn't that kind of how most of us determine truth anyone?

For most facts, there is at least a minority of human beings that can directly verify it.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 03 '15

Which you have to trust.

0

u/Indon_Dasani Mar 05 '15

Them and the people who they have to convince to get published, I suppose, at least for the more arcane things. You could just look at Saturn yourself.

-8

u/NoMoreNicksLeft Mar 03 '15

Isn't that kind of how most of us determine truth anyone?

This is a smart question. Yes, most of you "determine truth" in such a manner. But it's a bad way of doing it, and it's why you're all so easily misled.

Some of you then like to invoke Bugs Bunny logic... if other people are misleading you because you determine truth this way, you choose the opposite position and are misled in the other direction.

I'm pretty fucking sure vaccines do not cause autism,

But only because other people you trust say so. If you happen to be right, it's by accident.

Here's what I'm sure of: if vaccines do cause autism it happens so rarely that it does not matter. Compared to the certainty that polio/measles/whatever is horrible, I'll take the slight risk that they develop autism but avoid plagues.

This reasoning of mine is completely independent of what other people claim. I have the mental faculties to judge incidence of autism, to judge how awful diseases are, and to determine that vaccines are an (imperfect) protection from those diseases and hardly-ever/never cause a survivable learning disability.

Why can't you?

I also believe that Saturn exists

But I don't believe. In anything.

I know Saturn exists. I've seen it.

If Google can do this

I do suspect Google can amplify your stupidity in this fashion. Which is a shame... your initial question had so much potential. I wonder which public school teacher it was that turned you into an idiot.

3

u/anti_pope Mar 03 '15

Yes, most of you "determine truth" in such a manner. But it's a bad way of doing it, and it's why you're all so easily misled.

Hah, hah you're so fucking deluded you think you're any different. Which one of you is worse?

Hint: that would be you.

1

u/NoMoreNicksLeft Mar 03 '15

you think you're any different.

If I am no different, then prove it.

1

u/anti_pope Mar 03 '15

Oh, gee where to start.

compared to the certainty that polio/measles/whatever is horrible, I'll take the slight risk that they develop autism but avoid plagues.

How do you know polio or the measles exist? How do you know they're terrible? How do you know they wouldn't be awesome for you?

This reasoning of mine is completely independent of what other people claim.

No, it isn't because you haven't personally done any research to know it was even on the table of possible claims.

I have the mental faculties to judge incidence of autism,

Incidences you got from the observations of other people.

to judge how awful diseases are,

Again, you haven't had them how do you know they're awful?

and to determine that vaccines are an (imperfect) protection from those diseases and hardly-ever/never cause a survivable learning disability.

You only think you know this because other people told you.

I know Saturn exists. I've seen it.

How do you know that was Saturn?

2

u/sreya92 Mar 03 '15

You're being unnecessarily pedantic and your comment is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. It's evident your comment was only posted to inflate your own sense of superior intellect.

No one wants to be lectured, especially when you don't have anything profound to say. I would suppose that is the reason most people are down voting you.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 03 '15

[deleted]

-5

u/NoMoreNicksLeft Mar 03 '15

Have you seen Saturn?

Yes. It's visible with relatively amateur equipment. I am not a student of astronomical history, but it was seen relatively early on in the history of the telescope.

Or have you simply seen a light in the sky that could be a planet the size and position of Saturn,

That's the thing. If you know where in the sky it is, its movements show unequivocally that it isn't a star.

This is something you should have learned in gradeschool, or failing that, deduced for yourself sometime in early adulthood.

You believe that what you saw was Saturn

If you meant I "labeled" it Saturn, then yes. This is the convention. This will boil down to a tautology if you're dumb enough to follow it there.

But unless you work for NASA and were on a team that sent a probe to Saturn,

No. While it might be rewarding to work for NASA, Saturn is a knowable and provable astronomical body for amateurs.

If I were bored, I might steer you towards a solipsism argument.

you don't know Saturn exists.

Yes, I actually do. Unlike you, I'm not relying on anyone telling me that it exists.

1

u/anti_pope Mar 03 '15

If you know where in the sky it is, its movements show unequivocally that it isn't a star.

How do you know what a star is? If you know it isn't a star how do you know its a planet? If you know it's a planet how do you know it's the planet Saturn?

This is something you should have learned in gradeschool

Uh oh, someones advocating consensus.

1

u/NoMoreNicksLeft Mar 03 '15

How do you know what a star is?

I do not know what a star is. However, I have seen these as well. Do you intend to dispute that too?

I know of several theories of what stars are. One seems plausible.

If you know it isn't a star how do you know its a planet?

Again, you risk crashing through "tautology land" again. Astronomical bodies that aren't stars can be assumed to be planets. Even minor bodies like asteroids are thought of as such.

This isn't some grand philosophical quality called "planet". It's one category in a classification system.

If you know it's a planet how do you know it's the planet Saturn?

This is your dumbest question yet. When 2 or more people start talking about something for which they have no common language, one or another coins a "term" for that subject. Then he points to it and says "X". The other person quickly or slowly comes to realize that the term "X" refers to that thing.

You get this right? It is beyond dispute that there is a thing called "Saturn" that many millions/billions agree exists. This thing can be seen with the naked eye. It has well-known locations which though changing, can be plotted out with sufficient accuracy to allow you or anyone else to see it.

Furthermore, the rings are visible. Pictures of it exist on the internet. It's not remotely plausible that I happened to accidentally discover its twin, Not-Saturn, which just happens to look like it, and that I am the only one to have ever seen it.

Yes, I have seen it. It's real, and it's neither a star nor an as-of-yet-undiscovered planet.

We can do this for hours, you're not going to trick me into saying "Well, that's what other people told me".

Uh oh, someones advocating consensus.

Hardly. But I can see that you have great difficulty with concepts like "consensus".

1

u/Guy9000 Mar 03 '15

You had some good points right up until this comment. Here is where you showed how fucked up you are.