Slashdot Mirror


The Age of Distributed Truth (eugenewei.com)

Eugene Wei, head of video at Oculus (Formerly with Flipboard, Hulu, and Amazon) writes about how information gets distributed now, and things that were commonly known in specific circles are becoming more widely known. From his article: The internet gave everyone a megaphone, and these days that can feel like that Chinese proverb, you know the one. Perhaps the truth was better kept in the hands of a limited set of responsible stewards, but that age of the expert has passed, and that system had its own issues. As every Death Star reminds us each time they're blown up, concentrating power in a small area has its own unique vulnerability. We live in the age of distributed truth, and it's an environment in which fake news can spread like mold when in viral form. But the same applies to the truth, and if there's one lesson on how to do your part in an age of distributed truth, it's to speak the truth and to support those who do. It may be exhausting work -- is it really necessary to point out the emperor is buck naked? -- but it's the best we can do for now. In this age, the silent majority is no majority at all.

51 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Show me an inviolate person

    There's your problem. You're looking for perfect unblemished snowflakes (which don't exist) instead of doing the boring, mundane work of verification and cross checking of the facts at hand. No wonder you're paranoid.

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  2. Truth is not what you think it is by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Informative

    For example, some of you incorrectly think Russia hacking the US election is "fake news". This is incorrect.

    Some of you think Russia interfered on social media in the US election. This is true, but it is not true, in that it was far worse than that, and at a scale you would find difficult to believe.

    Some of you think Russia may have hacked 15 states and only looked at data in a few counties in those states. This is not true, as it is far far worse.

    Some of you think Russia hacked 39 states and only looked at data and gave it to certain individuals they controlled. This is not true, as it is far worse.

    A very very few of you know that Russia attempted to hack every state, managed to disable specific precincts voting machines, created large scale disruption, and altered reporting systems for electronic-only non-paper-trail counts, and also maintained large scale social media attacks. This is very true, but most people, sadly, think it's false.

    Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by king+neckbeard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Some of us think that Russia engaged in low level phishing attempts against everything during the election, just as they do for every election everywhere, and just about any internet facing server.

      Some of us think that the US also does pretty much the same thing, with the same level of power.

      Some of us knew both of those things because we've read enough posts on slashdot to have sysadmins repeat this fact at least a hundred times.

      The reality is far worse than the fake news of the Russia story. The people undermining our elections are not far away oligarchs. They are domestic oligarchs, which have far more conflicts of interest.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by XXongo · · Score: 2

      Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

      Yes, in fact I do.

      I don't want claims and allegations. I want verifiable facts and details.

    3. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      A very very few of you know that Russia attempted to hack every state, managed to disable specific precincts voting machines, created large scale disruption, and altered reporting systems for electronic-only non-paper-trail counts, and also maintained large scale social media attacks. This is very true, but most people, sadly, think it's false.

      Do you have sources/citations for this?

    4. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      He does not. This is just the last vestiges of the neoliberals going "all-in" on the only narrative that might prevent them from being ousted by their own party members.

      Just look at it.. its talking about fake news... but isnt talking about fox/msnbc/cnn/etc ...

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    5. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

      Yes, in fact I do.

      I don't want claims and allegations. I want verifiable facts and details.

      You're not cleared for that.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    6. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

      Yes.
      Does The Lord of the Rings trilogy end when Gandalf falls to his doom while fighting the demon? Wtf bro.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    7. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2

      Ah yes, security clearance. The age-old refuge of making extraordinary claims without that pesky need to provide extraordinary evidence.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    8. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Both terms are largely in terms of funding. If you are funded by something other than our media oligoply, you get painted as fake news. If you are part of the oligopoly, you are mainstream media. "MSM" is fairly well defined, as it basically equals media networks of comparable size to News Corporation, and largely coincides with people who make more in a week than the average American does in a year.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    9. Re: Truth is not what you think it is by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      It does not matter what we want. The problem with conspiracy is practical unverifiability.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    10. Re: Truth is not what you think it is by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      By 2.86 million MORE votes, she was.
      the SELECTION in violation of the 14th Amendment guarantee of EQUAL rights however....but the ELECTION went to Hillary by 2.86 million MORE votes.

  3. Step 1 to sticking up for the truth: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Stop silencing it. Stop labeling opinions that seem "mean" or "spiteful" as hate speech. Free speech is essential to unmasking the truth. Problem these days is this country is just one big dramatization of "a few good men".

  4. Stewards, eh? by grasshoppa · · Score: 2

    We have absolutely no grasp of how much better our lives are now, and how much better they're going to be in the future, due to advancements in communication technology.

    Take the healthcare industry. The joke is, of course, that doctors hate it when their patients internet-diagnose themselves, but the truth of the matter is that the internet enables patients to have a much greater degree of participation in their own health. This is amazing. Doctors are, generally speaking, pretty smart people, but they are also very busy. Having a patient who takes an active role in their health make visits far more efficient and effective. That's just one industry, and we haven't really progressed far with AI yet. Imagine what's coming: a doctor that lives in your browser that can make recommendations based on data from your telemetry band. Preemptive heart treatment. Prescriptions auto modified based on your reactions to them.

    Some may lament days gone by of the "Experts", but they can have it. I'm looking forward to the future.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:Stewards, eh? by MangoCats · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff. In the old days you asked a doctor to treat a condition, he tried the best he could and you had to be content with that. When I had a procedure done in 2012 and I wasn't happy with the outcome, I was able to look it up online, find relative success rates and recovery times and find out that: yes, I should have expected nearly full recovery in 2 weeks instead of 3+ months, no, I should not have expected the joint locking and other side effects I suffered due to the long recovery, and, in point of fact, my outcome was worse than more than 99% of patients who had similar procedures done in the last 30 years. A litigious person can then take that data to court and seek damages, but I would consider the lost time and effort of such an endeavor to be "more damaging" to my life than this particular outcome, so I let it go.

      Similarly, I went to a lawyer to ask about certain civil rights issues and he more or less blew smoke up any available orifice with stories about how there aren't any lawyers within 200 miles who would even begin to touch a case like that, you have no grounds, etc. etc. essentially, he was representing "the other side" even though I had paid him a consultation fee. I already knew he was full of BS from previous internet research, and within 4 hours I had found a different lawyer, halfway between this clown's office and my home, who did represent us gratis and got the result we were looking for from the school board within a matter of days. In the old days, you would be forced to take the local representatives word for things, or travel great distances to do extensive research and consulting.

    2. Re:Stewards, eh? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      A litigious person can then take that data to court and seek damages, but I would consider the lost time and effort of such an endeavor to be "more damaging" to my life than this particular outcome, so I let it go.

      Translation: You don't care about the next guy that doctor fucks up. Its all about your time and effort and how that might benefit you.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:Stewards, eh? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff. In the old days you asked a doctor to treat a condition, he tried the best he could and you had to be content with that.

      It was hardly that uncommon to get a second opinion in serious matters. And though it might chafe them a bit to realize the patient knows more about their particular condition than they do, I think most recognize the genuine self-interest people have in their own health and if smart patients effectively do a micro-study of medicine to understand it better they're cool with that. At least the doctors I've talked too haven't been hostile or defensive, then again I've inquired about treatment options not gathering evidence on a botched procedure. I still think they're far more concerned with the self-diagnosing, self-medicating, homeopathic anti-vaxxer alternative medicine crowd who reject tested and mostly working procedures and medications because they watched a bunch of YouTube videos and read blogs.

      You could think that with so much good information available, that's what most people would find. But people's confirmation bias is stronger than their objectivity, on the Internet there's so much BS you can pick the reality you want. For example, on one forum I frequent about 80-90% vote for a party that has 10-15% nationally and there's always those who believe the polls and elections are rigged because "everybody" they know agrees with them. They just refuse to accept that there are vast numbers of people who think completely differently than them. There are so many ways to get lost where you only travel in circles from bad data to more bad data, I think the human mind is designed for tribes where if 200 people say something it's a lot. But not if it's 200 loons out of 5 million.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Stewards, eh? by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Imagine what's coming: a doctor that lives in your browser that can make recommendations based on data from your telemetry band. Preemptive heart treatment. Prescriptions auto modified based on your reactions to them.

      Ho Ho Ho!

      And your insurance company knowing every little detail about your health :) Can't wait for that day!

      --
      I tend to rant.
    5. Re:Stewards, eh? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Are you an expert in something? Do you find people coming to you about $whateverThatIs with their heads full of nonsense that they don't have the breadth and background knowledge to understand, and which they got second hand from someone who knows even less and/or has some agenda to push?

      Great, isn't it?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Stewards, eh? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it was going to be all sunshine and roses. There are definitely downsides, but what you mentioned barely rates as an annoyance. Those same people who think they know what they're talking about because they read an article online ALSO sometimes have some pretty good ideas. More, their good ideas are informed by the knowledge they gained online. They may not be able to execute the idea, but that's where I come in.

      Knowledge workers aren't going away as a result of the internet, but rather their roles will change and in many cases allow them to better use their energy on more interesting tasks.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    7. Re:Stewards, eh? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

      One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff.

      Some, sure. You'll have low energy assholes in every field who just want to coast, and having an educated client upsets that balance.

      Fuck them.

      The ones who will thrive are my kind of people; those that are constantly improving, looking for new and innovative ways to solve old problems and more efficiently use their time. Won't be hard to tell the difference between the two, either.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    8. Re:Stewards, eh? by MangoCats · · Score: 1

      Translation: I've got better ways to improve society than launching litigation against a doctor whose removal from practice might, or might not improve the overall state of healthcare.

  5. What Chinese proverb? by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The internet gave everyone a megaphone, and these days that can feel like that Chinese proverb, you know the one.

    No. I don't know the one. After googling I still don't know it. Has anyone figured it out?

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:What Chinese proverb? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's by Confucius. It starts with "Man who goes to bed with itchy bottom..."

    2. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      If he's angling for what I think he's angling for, ancient Chinese curse would've been the right description: "May you live in interesting times."

    3. Re:What Chinese proverb? by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 2

      "It is only when a mosquito lands on one's testicle that one realizes all problems can be solved without violence."

      --
      I tend to rant.
    4. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Opyros · · Score: 1

      Probably. And in that case, he's referring to an urban legend rather than an authentic Chinese saying.

    5. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Give a man a megaphone, and he can yell for a day. Teach him how to make megaphones, and he can yell for a lifetime.

      Or something like that.

    6. Re:What Chinese proverb? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      No. I don't know the one. After googling I still don't know. Has anyone figured it out?

      I lived in China for several years, speak Mandarin, know several hundred chengyu, and I have no idea what TFS is referring to.

      My wife is Chinese, and I just asked her if she is aware of any ancient Chinese proverbs that refer to megaphones, and she said no.

    7. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought, but it's not really relevant to the context.

      How about "Don't trust a barber who says you need a haircut"?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. I thought this article was going to be interesting by xantonin · · Score: 1

    ...until it mentioned fake news.

    I'm so tired of the "fake news" about "fake news" FFS

  7. Experts aren't simply truth receptacles by Dripdry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Experts are people who take truth/knowledge and process it. They apply what is applicable, creatively and pragmatically.
    This nonsense about the death of the expert is, itself, an untruth.

    --
    -
    1. Re: Experts aren't simply truth receptacles by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Death means nobody few hear it behind the white noise of megaphones.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  8. Quotable quote by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That goes in my quotable quotes file:
    " if there's one lesson on how to do your part in an age of distributed truth, it's to speak the truth and to support those who do. It may be exhausting work but it's the best we can do for now."

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  9. It is all in how you tell it by XXongo · · Score: 1
    An interesting article, but I draw away from it a far different conclusion than what the superficial /. summary suggests. The key is, as the examples in the article explicitly show, how the story is told (and in what forum.)

    Apparently lots of people knew about the toxic environment at Uber. Why, then, did Susan Fowler's blog post end up being the one that set off the dynamite?

    "It almost sounds naive, but it's clear she knows what's happening, and how in this high stakes game of poker, she has to be the coolest player at the table, lest she, like so many women before her, be labeled some hysteric. Her post is a masterpiece of tone and rhetorical control, and it had to be. No resorting to snark or irony or any number of tricks of the clever; she bore her own witness, and no better witness could an attorney have imagined."

  10. Truth Gatekeepers by Bigbutt · · Score: 2

    One problem I've found is that scientific research is mostly behind paywalls of some sort. Either you read an article where the company has access to the site and you get an interpretation or you pay the $10 or $100 or $1000 for access to the raw data and report.

    But any nut job can set up a website and as long as it sounds believable (for small values of belief), he or she will have a following of similar nut jobs.

    [John]

    --
    Shit better not happen!
  11. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    Naive A/C, your confession is enough for me.

  12. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by Presence+Eternal · · Score: 1

    "Nullius in verba" is a similar and very beautiful motto, but it does NOT mean we can't believe people. It just means we need to have fact checking. I'm rather fond of a video where Neil Degrasse Tyson says something like "Don't take my word for it. Get some astronomy software. You'll see this 'devastating event' happens EVERY YEAR."

  13. So truth is just a jumble of words? by petes_PoV · · Score: 2

    From his article:

    Was this meandering collection of platitudes, non-sequiturs and aphorisms supposed to contain some great insight?

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  14. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

    If there's one lesson from the 20th Century it's "Trust No One"

    And the others are "Stay Alert" and "Keep Your Laser Handy."

  15. I read this somewhere once by millertym · · Score: 1

    For men shall be... Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

  16. The Clintons are a perfect example by knorthern+knight · · Score: 2

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-j...

    > Three years before Matt Drudge changed the world and how news would be consumed,
    > President Bill Clinton's White House feared that the Internet was allowing average
    > citizens, especially conservatives, to bypass legacy gatekeepers and access
    > information that had previously been denied to them by the mainstream press.
    >
    > The infamous 1995 "conspiracy commerce memo" tried to demonize and discredit alternative
    > media outlets on the right to mainstream media organizations and D.C. establishment figures.

    President Kennedy made Bill Clinton look like a saint. He was fucking women all over the place, e.g. Marilyn Monroe. But there was no internet back in the early 1960's, and the MSM lapdogs were all protective of a Democrat president. Compare that with Bill Clinton in 1998. The MSM were still protecting their Democrat president. But there was now a thing called "the internet" or "the web". Along came a lowly store clerk (Matt Drudge) with a modem

    http://australianpolitics.com/...

    > Web Posted: 01/17/98 23:32:47 PST -- NEWSWEEK KILLS STORY ON WHITE HOUSE INTERN
    >
    > BLOCKBUSTER REPORT: 23-YEAR OLD, FORMER WHITE HOUSE INTERN, SEX RELATIONSHIP WITH PRESIDENT
    >
    > **World Exclusive**
    > **Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**
    >
    > At the last minute, at 6 p.m. on Saturday evening, NEWSWEEK magazine
    > killed a story that was destined to shake official Washington to its foundation: A White House
    > intern carried on a sexual affair with the President of the United States!

    Hillary Clinton's response was to lament the lack of "internet gatekeepers". http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  17. You simply have to realize the truth... by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

    There is no truth.

    --
    I tend to rant.
  18. ... that Chinese proverb, you know the one ... by psergiu · · Score: 1

    I do not know "that Chinese proverb". Anyone here knows-it ?

    --
    1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
    1. Re:... that Chinese proverb, you know the one ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      "People will believe anything if you attribute it to Mark Twain".

      Author is mistaken as it's not actually Chinese. It was by Benjamin Franklin.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  19. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by networkBoy · · Score: 1

    Don't forget your towel

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  20. You can't handle the truth by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    That is why you down mod.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  21. Jedi Master Elmer Fudd by epine · · Score: 1

    As every Death Star reminds us each time they're blown up

    A million college professors cried out in anguish and were left gnawing the knuckle of their remaining hand.

  22. Re:Bronx shooting could have been avoided... by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    Bronx Shooting? As opposed to every other mass shooting.
    That's a 1 D 10 T statement if there ever was one.

  23. Support those who speak the truth by Ocrad · · Score: 1

    if there's one lesson on how to do your part in an age of distributed truth, it's to speak the truth and to support those who do.

    Xz format inadequate for long-term archiving

  24. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by ananamouse · · Score: 1

    Twain is quoted, "If you don't read the papers you are uninformed. If you read the papers you are misinformed." Today we have personal control of our misinformation and plenty of it to wallow in.