New browser red-flags disputed facts on the web

Canadian Press ^ | 29 Aug 2009 | James Keller

[SERKIT]

Then the White Crib website will be all red? As if it isn’t already?

[Sprite518]

It will not work.. People and not software will ultimately have to decide based on the evidence, facts and logic.

[2harddrive]

It wil become a LEFTIST tool of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!

[theFIRMbss]

> Dispute Finder, an experimental browser extension developed by Intel

I'm guessing it will
immediately flag all
AMD chip claims...

[Sprite518]

LOL! On the comment of “The White Crib”.

[justkate]

Total idiocy. There won’t be a single site that has not been “flagged,” countless times. And when/if 1 flag goes away, another will take it’s place.

Even the url will get flagged.

[Sprite518]

You got it. It’s designed for uniformed people to be easily manipulated, indoctrinated, and ultimately sheeple.

[muir_redwoods]

I already own this utility.It’s called a brain

[Sparko]

“There already are a number of websites that attempt to poke holes in fiction masquerading as fact, such as Snopes.com and FactCheck.org. Media outlets have done so-called “reality-check” stories to assess claims in the news for years.”

Oh, yes. They’re very reliable. As is Wikipedia.
For information like largest islands* and tallest peaks*. Provided you look at them at a slant.

* and even those factoids are not agreed upon.

Dispute Finder will be a tool according to the views of who operate it and will thus be disputed as well.

[jessduntno]

So when you say po-tay-to and I say po-tah-to...it will be in red letters? Oh, goody...I hope that’s a feature that will be installed everywhere and can’t (or cahn’t) be removed by anyone...finally, the primary use of the internet for mass debating will be official...

[Question Liberal Authority]

"It's important to be aware when something you're reading is not the only opinion, when there is another point of view worth paying attention to," says California-based Intel researcher Rob Ennals.

That simply is not true.

"The real problem is, when you don't realize something is disputed, you don't realize there are other points of view and you might not be aware you've wandered into a dispute."

Pure hogwash.

"The good thing is that if something is disputed enough that people will care, the chances are that someone is going to care enough to mark it as disputed," says Ennals.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

"I don't think we can really be the arbiters of truth, we can't tell you automatically what is true and what is false. All we can really hope to do is, if there's a credible source that gives a credible point of view, let you know."

Balderdash! "Once you actually believe something, it takes quite a lot of data or evidence to overcome that belief and it takes a lot of attention to do that," says Fugelsang.

Utterly ridiculous.

"With a lot of repeat exposures, it does change."

Liar! Liar! You creepy liar!

[justkate]

There already are a number of websites that attempt to poke holes in fiction masquerading as fact...

Free Republic is my current fav.

[theFIRMbss]

An argument's not simply denying something somebody asserts!

[Question Liberal Authority]

Yes it is!

[theFIRMbss]

>There already are a number of websites that attempt to poke holes in fiction masquerading as fact...
>>Free Republic is my current fav

History Unfolding

[Sparko]

"I already own this utility. It’s called a brain"

bttt

Besides, we lost control over content years ago with the first gopher utilities. Remember these?

or an earlier version:

[theFIRMbss]

>Yes it is!

Can't argue, I'm off
to meet a woman and get
yelled at for an hour.

[justkate]

TY for the link...I hadn’t see that post.

I’ve been reading early 20th poetry again & honestly believe we are living the final epic battle for Mankind’s soul.

[Tainan]

I’m sensing some skepticism on your part regarding this.