Web creator wants changes to steer people clear of conspiraloon nutjobs

[fela fan]

'conspiraloon nutjobs'...

 

[editor]

The BBC article has a bit more detail on what this Foundation is for - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7613201.stm

I think he may regret ever mentioning the site rating thing, which seems a relatively minor part. Journalists will pounce on it and then lots of twats will half-read the headline and scream "OMG he wants to CENSOR the INTERNET".

Yep. I think we've already seen some of that right here.

 

[fela fan]

I'm not saying I'm for any kind of censorship here by the way, but from my experience of dealing with loons here, I can see how some sort of 'credibility' rating for sites could come in useful when dealing with some of the wild claims we've seen here - it might have at least saved the time of many urbanites trawling through bonkers loon sites to inevitably find some dodgy charlatan at its source.

And so this is interesting...

Either urbanites are too stupid to quickly realise they've arrived at a 'bonkers' website, or the site looks pretty okay until they find a name they have previously encountered. And having found that name, the site is now 'bonkers', even though it was actually looking okay before that name cropped up into the consciousness.

It's not what people say, rather who the people are. Is that right editor? Or are your urbanites too slow and stupid in recognising the 'loon' websites?

I bet you could offer some kind of instant detector to those interested in controlling our rights to surf what we would like to surf, uninhibited by control-freaks.

 

[editor]

I bet you could offer some kind of instant detector to those interested in controlling our rights to surf what we would like to surf, uninhibited by control-freaks.

Like I said earlier, you don't half post up some fucking shite.

 

[fela fan]

Like I said earlier, you don't half post up some fucking shite.

I don't think so. You have created your own 'loon' lexicon here on urban. I think it a fair comment since you are always banging on about loons and the like.

In any event, you missed the bulk of my post there. Presumably by your edit and quote of me, that part was not 'fucking shite'?

 

[likesfish]

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=9/11+the+truth&s
confronted with this Bozon super mass
tim probably wishes he's never bothered

 

[editor]

I don't think so. You have created your own 'loon' lexicon here on urban. I think it a fair comment since you are always banging on about loons and the like.

In any event, you missed the bulk of my post there. Presumably by your edit and quote of me, that part was not 'fucking shite'?

Not 'missed' but 'ignored' because of the aforementioned comment about the shite you type.

 

[Darios]

"...but says that the web today needs to provide people with a way to determine which information is reliable and which is not."

Philosophers have been trying, and failing to consistently find such "a way" for thousands of years. Good luck.

 

[two sheds]

Things don't look good for my Proof of the Aether

 

[Jazzz]

lol! As if any conspiracy theorist worth their salt is going to be steered towards 'government approved' information

I'm sure we could expect urban75 to be blacklisted thanks to its drugs forum if nothing else

 

[editor]

lol! As if any conspiracy theorist worth their salt is going to be steered towards 'government approved' information

I'm sure we could expect urban75 to be blacklisted thanks to its drugs forum if nothing else

As usual, Jazzz has fails to establish even a passing acquaintance with the facts before posting up his usual ill informed tosh.

At no point does Berners Lee mention government involvement. That's all in your head, like holographic planes, talking terriers and sci-fi military manuals from the future.

Now read, learn and shut up: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7613201.stm

 

[Jazzz]

At no point does Berners Lee mention government involvement.

Well, he wouldn't would he?

But seriously, regardless of how persuaded by such a system I might be you only have to google to find questioning. I think this one sums it very well:

Concerns

We are a little concerned about a conversation Berners Lee had with the BBC prior to unveiling the Foundation where he argued that there needs to be some way to brand trustworthy websites as trustworthy. That strikes us as either silly or frightening, possibly both.

ReadWriteWeb

 

[fela fan]

Not 'missed' but 'ignored' because of the aforementioned comment about the shite you type.

Ignored because my argument was exposing the folly of yours.

And i don't type 'shite'. And how would you know if you ignore what i say anyhow?

 

[Jazzz]

Some more panning:

Tim Berners-Lee has lost the plot - Inquisitr

Any attempt at grading internet content based on truth would be the start of a slippery slope towards global totalitarianism. We may not like everything on the internet, but as Robert Houghwout Jackson, US Supreme Court Judge and Chief United States prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials said: “The price of freedom of religion, or of speech, or of the press, is that we must put up with a good deal of rubbish.”

 

[fela fan]

Well, if tbl has lost the plot, then so has the editor for posting this up in defence of what the man was saying in the article he quoted.

 

[kyser_soze]

You know what - TBL wrote that because, when he created the WWW he, in the manner of many scientists, probably thought 'What a great idea this is! It will enable people from around the world to collaborate on science and other projects in a reletively easy and straighforward way because it doesn't require deep computer skills to use.'

Now his colleagues at CERN are getting death threats from idiots about the LHC and he's rightly pissed off about it, he writes something about the amount of crap on the web, makes one suggestion, and within a day exactly the thing he was talking about has happened, even within this thread - largely led by two idiots for whom relying on poorly sourced and badly evidenced websites is a lifestyle choice.

Quite clearly this has also been subject to the network effect - altho if you read the comments to the article there are a pile of people agreeing with TBL, with a couple saying that it's almost inevitable that it will happen as the web expands...

 

[Dillinger4]

You know what - TBL wrote that because, when he created the WWW he, in the manner of many scientists, probably thought 'What a great idea this is! It will enable people from around the world to collaborate on science and other projects in a reletively easy and straighforward way because it doesn't require deep computer skills to use.'

Now his colleagues at CERN are getting death threats from idiots about the LHC and he's rightly pissed off about it, he writes something about the amount of crap on the web, makes one suggestion, and within a day exactly the thing he was talking about has happened, even within this thread - largely led by two idiots for whom relying on poorly sourced and badly evidenced websites is a lifestyle choice.

Quite clearly this has also been subject to the network effect - altho if you read the comments to the article there are a pile of people agreeing with TBL, with a couple saying that it's almost inevitable that it will happen as the web expands.

The irony is wonderful.

 

[lobster]

This is quite a interesting article on ratings...

 

[Jazzz]

Now his colleagues at CERN are getting death threats from idiots about the LHC and he's rightly pissed off about it, he writes something about the amount of crap on the web, makes one suggestion, and within a day exactly the thing he was talking about has happened, even within this thread - largely led by two idiots for whom relying on poorly sourced and badly evidenced websites is a lifestyle choice.

look kyser - maybe you and editor need a 'net nanny' to tell you what to believe - I don't, I'm happy making up my own mind, thankyouverymuch.

If anyone's 'idiotic' it's those who think that attempts to grade internet pages could not be the thin end of a censorship wedge beloved by totalitarian governments

 

[kyser_soze]

You haven't read either the original article OR the comments to the one you linked to, did you? TBL didn't advocate govt intervention OR censorship, but a process akin to peer review that could be built into the structure of the web - indeed, as someone points out to the author of the 'TBL looses the plot', his own article is rated for usefulness, which is what TBL was getting at, not your 'totalitarian censorship' nonsence, which incidentally proves exactly what TBL was saying about misreporting and rumour...

look kyser - maybe you and editor need a 'net nanny' to tell you what to believe - I don't, I'm happy making up my own mind, thankyouverymuch.

Yes, and we've all seen you get into bed with neo-nazis, anti-semites and other evidence free and unsavoury websites. I leave the world to judge the results of you 'making your own mind up'...

 

[Jazzz]

You haven't read either the original article OR the comments to the one you linked to, did you? TBL didn't advocate govt intervention OR censorship, but a process akin to peer review that could be built into the structure of the web - indeed, as someone points out to the author of the 'TBL looses the plot', his own article is rated for usefulness, which is what TBL was getting at, not your 'totalitarian censorship' nonsence, which incidentally proves exactly what TBL was saying about misreporting and rumour...

Peer-review is a system of censorship. You seem to be confused.

Clearly TBL wasn't proposing the voluntary 'user ratings' systems which are already used

I rate your posts 0/10

 

[isitme]

has anyone mentioned that this guy who wants a ratings approved system is high up in CERN who are very strongly linked to Freemasonry and new world order. They just built a black hole in Switzerland so of course they don't want people with their eyes open to question what they are doing

 

[Jazzz]

Well, this is it. There may be certain groups that would love to be able to dictate what truth is, and make sure that nothing to the contrary comes out over the internet.

I used to watch new programmes and think 'this is the news'. Now with the internet, I watch the news and think 'this is what they are reporting'. I'm sure that's the case with most posters here as well. You can say that the usual media has all kinds of fact-checking and safeguards, but the truth is they are filtered. It is the marvel of the internet that the filter is off and we can draw our own conclusions. Hurrah for that, and thanks TBL, but I'd rather you didn't try to put the cat back in the bag.

And as far as the black hole threat story goes, that was reported in the mass media which jumped on the sensation.

 

[isitme]

I was half joking, but that guy would be one of the people who would benefit a lot from being able to control people what people said about his organisation....

 

[editor]

Some more panning:
Tim Berners-Lee has lost the plot - Inquisitr

Well, if that's what a site about "tech, pop and penguins" says, then who I am to argue with such an impeccable source?

Now his colleagues at CERN are getting death threats from idiots about the LHC and he's rightly pissed off about it, he writes something about the amount of crap on the web, makes one suggestion, and within a day exactly the thing he was talking about has happened, even within this thread - largely led by two idiots for whom relying on poorly sourced and badly evidenced websites is a lifestyle choice.

I think you've summed it up perfectly. Jazzz has already demonstrated his woeful inability to read or even understand the basic concepts being discussed - hence his idiotic drivel about "government improved information."

 

[FridgeMagnet]

This is quite a interesting article on ratings...

Yuh, that was pretty much the sort of thing that I was thinking about when I posted earlier, though I don't really know what TBL has in mind - he's a smart chap obviously but sometimes doesn't really seem to understand what people are actually doing with this web thing. Apart from posting conspiracy crap and pictures of their cats.

 

[TwoTimer]

You don't 'alf post up some ridiculous shite. If it wasn't for Berners-Lee you wouldn't even be able to share your fascinating opinions, so try giving the guy some credit.

What would your reaction be, when you find out that Sky will be doing deals where only sites with certain ratings are offered free in their internet bundles?

What would your reaction be, when the largest ISPs bring in free internet which ONLY goes to the sites which have a rating, charging a premium (Which 9 out of 10 people won't pay) for the rest?

Sorry, but I really do think this weak minded fool is being influenced by the two tier internet lobby.

 

[Jazzz]

Well, if that's what a site about "tech, pop and penguins" says, then who I am to argue with such an impeccable source?

The Guardian quoted the same article. Of course, if you simply judge what you read on its own merits, this makes no difference at all. But that's a bit scary for some, especially editor, who is always looking to be spoon-fed from trusted sources; for him, it would seem it matters more where something comes from than what it says.

So actually maybe this isn't such a bad idea. editor can have his kite-marks of officially-sanctioned websites, this means he doesn't have to bother thinking (not that he's threatened to anyway), and for some of the rest of us, we'll simply ignore them and get on with deciding things for ourselves

 

[FridgeMagnet]

we'll simply ignore them and get on with deciding things for ourselves

Oh, so actually it _wouldn't_ make any difference then?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

What would your reaction be, when you find out that Sky will be doing deals where only sites with certain ratings are offered free in their internet bundles?

What would your reaction be, when the largest ISPs bring in free internet which ONLY goes to the sites which have a rating, charging a premium (Which 9 out of 10 people won't pay) for the rest?

Sorry, but I really do think this weak minded fool is being influenced by the two tier internet lobby.

What a peculiarly aggressive first post!