Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by n1 on Tuesday August 26 2014, @04:48PM   Printer-friendly
from the most-of-twitter-to-be-flagged dept.

The National Science Foundation is funding the “Truthy” database, intended to detect “false and misleading ideas,” "political smears," and other "social pollution” in online political activity. Researchers at Indiana University have received $919,917 (so far) for this project. The resulting open-source platform will be made publicly available, including via a web service open to the public for "monitoring trends, bursts, and suspicious memes.”

According to the grant, “This service could mitigate the diffusion of false and misleading ideas, detect hate speech and subversive propaganda, and assist in the preservation of open debate."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by engblom on Wednesday August 27 2014, @05:35AM

    by engblom (556) on Wednesday August 27 2014, @05:35AM (#86091)

    So typically American to act like this, sadly. Grow up! Why legal action instead of discussing the problem with the other?

    I see it as a bad behavior to copy the other site without a discussion before doing it. However, the best for both sites would be if they shared content and this is something I think both should strive to achieve.

    If this would be two-way both sites would benefit as both sites would get more comments and stories. This would also force both sites to keep a nice UI. As soon as one site would get a more annoying UI they would risk having no users.

    So my message to both is to discuss and grow up!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by khedoros on Wednesday August 27 2014, @10:10PM

    by khedoros (2921) on Wednesday August 27 2014, @10:10PM (#86479)
    Pipedot's use of the content on their site doesn't provide a benefit to the community, as currently implemented.

    - If I comment on Soylentnews and someone replies on Pipedot, I'm not informed, and no discussion or dialog is created. I can't respond to something I can't hear.

    - Read the Pipedot About page. They're marketing themselves kind of like a Usenet client (a viewer of an underlying infrastructure). That would be a great justification for the site's behavior, if it were true.

    - Bad behavior sometimes needs spanked, not to destroy the actor, but to get them to behave better.

    Reworking a Slashdot-like engine is a good idea, and long overdue. It's admirable to modernize a tool that we use, and to provide another frontend interface to information. We should encourage that, because it's useful. But if I come to your website, copy the content verbatim, using your bandwidth and processing resources for my own goals, and without telling you, that's not acting in the public interest or in the interest of spreading information. That's pure self-interest. If Pipedot's staff wanted to promote freedom of information or multiple interfaces to a story database, then they should've contacted SoylentNews and set up a cross-site API for information transfer. That would be in the benefit of the community and freedom of information.