You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How to Solve Fake News with Proof of Consensus and Blockchains
Truth is another matter altogether. The purpose of consensus is to reach agreement. People need to make decisions based upon what other people actually believe whether or not what they believe is true or false.
Distortions in the process of reaching agreement is like corrupting the blockchain validation algorithm. Society can function even if everyone draws the wrong conclusion... at least there is no abuse. The abuse comes into play when people attempt to distort how people perceive each other's thoughts by censorship.
But agreement on what? For everyone to agree to a lie, undermines the validity of the exercise. Consensus to believe in a falsehood, is a failure in the system. It is an irrelevant goal.
Some things are neither true nor false, yet consensus is required and the result of that consensus has impacts on all of society.
Picking a currency is one example. Picking a side of the road to drive / walk on is another.
The result is less important than the process. Who shall determine the truth? From what frame of reference? Show me any process that is guaranteed to arrive at the truth and I'll show you how it will fail.
Only individuals can make an estimation of truth based upon their own perceptions. Consensus is the result of the majority of individuals coming to the same conclusion.
Assuming all individuals can communicate and have incentive to live in the truth then truth will prevail. If there is incentive to believe a lie, then the lie will prevail. This applies even on an individual basis.
yes, truth is based on personal perception, and experience develops perception, every individual has a unique experience, and their own level of truth based on their perceptions derived from personal experience... the paradox of truth. A soldier who has fought in a war has a different perception of what is true about war than a person who only knows stories about war.
But your title and topic is about solving fake news... That is not a decision of consensus on which side of the road cars should drive on (I still get mixed up when in the U.K.). It is about the reporting of facts to the public. Fake news is the reporting of falsehoods in the context of fact. So I am a bit confused in your reply. Sorry.
The solution to Fake News is to minimize its effect on Consensus. In particular we want to minimize the potential for Fake Consensus (e.g. polling results) because of the impact that Fake Consensus has on people's actions.
If we can provide provable consensus then we will have eliminated a large and dangerous category of Fake News and replaced it with truth. This consensus may still be centered around a falsehood, but at least it accurately reflects what people think.
When we don't even know what other people think, that is when the complete breakdown of communication occurs and society is in trouble.
Your work is making me a better person. It's a work in progress but I'm very grateful to say the least. I listened to this article twice and I planed on scanning it at least once.
The comments you have made on this tread are making the article even clearer.