We’re not talking about differing views but about flat lies.
It’s basically a DDOS attack. It takes seconds especially with AI to generate bullshit but hours to debunk it.
I certainly haven’t thought of a way to address that imbalance.
It’s basically a DDOS attack. It takes seconds especially with AI to generate bullshit but hours to debunk it.
I certainly haven’t thought of a way to address that imbalance.
Of course this falls apart in this day and age, where many seem to rely on whatever flows thru their social media feeds / reels.
It is certainly a user problem, where we need to counter by educating ourselves to deal with this the new reality of bad actors being common place, educate ourselves and our peers, and permanently solve the social chain of trust-issue in our digital lives with new technical solutions.
Or that Hunter's laptop outlining his old man's corruption was fake?
What do you think are lies that should be censored and how quick are you to identify them?
IIRC the articles had very poor ideas of what Americans would find scandalous because they spent much of their time talking about how big Hunter Biden's penis was.
Even non-political figures who are known to be corrupt will not be prosecuted or pursued because of the difficulty of securing a conviction or simply priorities and limited resources.
When it comes to people to with powerful political connections, you are talking a different level of 'difficulty pursing this case'.
No mystery no story.
It’s like when Bezos responded to a tabloid threatening to post his dick pic and out him for sending one by owning up to it and threatening to post it himself. Based.