Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: Crybabies (Score 1) 524

What I meant is that the driver license itself does not show whether you're a citizen or not. At least it certainly doesn't in my state.

With respect to proving residency, yes, I know that you don't actually need a deed (I had to prove residency as a non-citizen several times, albeit for other reasons). But you need an utility bill, bank statement etc in your name. It's pretty hard to get such a thing for a hotel room. I guess it might be possible to fool a bank like that, but I doubt it'd last long.

Comment Re: Crybabies (Score 1) 524

It's worth noting that getting a driver license does not require one to be a citizen - indeed, you can get one on pretty much any valid visa, including students or workers. So far as I know, most states don't put citizenship info on the license.

Now, doing this on vacation would be tricky, because you'd need to prove contiguous residence in the state, usually for at least 30 days. This generally requires a lease, not something like a hotel; and getting that on a tourist visa would be tricky.

Comment Re:Tech won't fix society (Score 1) 270

It all has value, absolutely! The problem is presenting it as "solution to fake news". This is setting the expectations way too high, and is an impossible bar to reach through that approach.

With respect to media environment being technological - it's true, but cultural effects still dominate. If Facebook, for example, added some kind of "fake news" indicator on stories, would it help? Probably not - people who read and reshare them will just ignore it, and would describe it as some kind of nefarious attempt by "Silicon Valley liberals" to push their world view on them. Eventually, someone would make browser extensions that would disable it completely, and people would install that.

Suppose FB just starts censoring such stories outright? Then they'd simply be shared somewhere else, on a (possibly new) social network created to cater to this freshly alienated by huge market. I would imagine that the guys running Breitbart would just love to give it a go.

Obviously, there are certain social effects - networking etc - that make existing platforms entrenched, and provide barriers to entry for new competitors. But the barriers are not insurmountable, and said social effects can be negated by sufficient amount of inconvenience caused by staying. I assert that any technical solution that is strong enough to actually solve this problem would constitute such sufficient amount of inconvenience.

Comment Re:Tech won't fix society (Score 1) 270

HOW IRONIC that you've proposed a technical solution for a social problem.

No, I didn't. The solution that I proposed is to the problem of determining fake news from real news - that is a technical problem. The social problem is different - how to make people believe and/or care that fake news are fake.

Comment Re:Tech won't fix society (Score 1) 270

The problem are all instances that people believe in.

And vast majority of them are only slightly more plausible than "aliens are controlling your minds". It's stuff like "Obama is secretly a Muslim who's plotting to have US occupied by UN". And I personally know some people who genuinely believe this, and will happily reshare any news from e.g. InfoWars that will support and reinforce that belief.

Comment Tech won't fix society (Score 3, Insightful) 270

"Fake news" is a social problem. And social problems, generally speaking, don't have technological solutions.

For example, all these suggestions for better and smarter algorithms to detect fake news. But why? It's not like fake news are hard to tell apart in general. Filter out anything that uses ALL CAPS anywhere in the title (acronyms excepted), and you've already solved 90% of the problem. And there are numerous guides already on the Internet that go over all these basics... the problem is that people who do read and spread those fake news don't believe that they're fake. And just because it's an algorithm in their browser or Facebook telling them that it's fake, they're not going to suddenly start believing it, regardless of how perfect it is. They'll just say, "Whoever implemented this is biased, and they're just trying to censor my trusted sources - fuck them", disable or ignore the feature (or switch to a product that doesn't have it - and there will be one if this becomes a thing; free market will always fill a niche), and move on.

So the real problem is, "How do you convince most people who currently believe that those news are real, that they're actually fake." And that is entirely a social problem, which tech cannot and will not solve.

Comment Re:WaPo - leaders in the post-fact era (Score 1) 272

I think you are missing my point. I'm not saying that left is unique in that. Right-wingers also love to fap on Putin! But for them it at least makes some ideological sense (esp. for alt-right, who don't care much for economic conservatism, and focus on its social aspects). The left is doing it solely on the basis of "enemy of my enemy is my friend", which is plainly not true in this case when ideological aspects are accounted for.

As for the definition of "hard left", I would consider any party that is firmly ideologically rooted in socialist or communist platforms of early-to-mid 20th century to be in that bucket. I didn't want to conflate it with Marxism, but given how predominant it is, I guess it's easier to just say it's any party that has a Marxism platform (and I mean guys who know what Marxism really is - who have read Marx, and understand what it is about! - not a kid with a latte in a Che Guevara t-shirt). This excludes all social democratic parties, and most mainstream democratic socialists (although the latter often have internal hardline Marxist factions, as e.g. Die Linke does).

FWIW, I am left wing myself, and I do consider a lot of what Marx had to say to be valid. But I am not a socialist or a communist.

Comment Re:WaPo - leaders in the post-fact era (Score 1) 272

The reason why I put "Western imperialism" in quotes is not because it didn't exist, but rather because what these guys refer to as such usually isn't it.

And there's no "by my definition", because I did not provide a definition of hard left. I merely said that those who are hard left, tend to be pro-anti-western-dictators. I didn't say that it is limited to them. That's one thing that they have in common with many on the fringe right, especially the economic populist varieties (which describes Trump and "alt-right").

Comment Re:WaPo - leaders in the post-fact era (Score 0) 272

I couldn't cite any single source that would cover it. But, honestly, all you need to do is just look at a website of pretty much any socialist or communist party in US or Europe. For example:

http://www.cpusa.org/article/c...

http://en.die-linke.de/nc/news...

Comment Re:Feel free to stop fucking that Russian chicken. (Score 0) 272

The funny thing is that to anyone who has seen the Russian pro-government online news, it's obvious that the West just got pwned by those same very people in that same exact way. We know, because we've seen it work in the same way to suppress opposition to Putin in Russia itself before. Now they have simply broadened the scope.

Slashdot Top Deals

A man is known by the company he organizes. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...