[Tfug] Truth Ratings For Websites

[Matthew T. Eskes]

I'm wondering if he's just stating this for a laugh. Because it really is
pretty damn funny.

-- The Founding Fathers struggled for the principle that man could and
should be trusted with his own destiny. Our current /domestic/ enemies,
against whom those Americans in uniform are sworn to defend, do not believe
in this principle, but we have again won a round in the endless fight
against them.
    
   -- Jeff Cooper on the assault weapons ban ending 

-----Original Message-----
From: tfug-bounces at tfug.org [mailto:tfug-bounces at tfug.org] On Behalf Of
Calvin Dodge
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 4:08 PM
To: Tucson Free Unix Group
Subject: Re: [Tfug] Truth Ratings For Websites

On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:34 PM, John Mc <jmcneill2 at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Berners-Lee Wants Truth Ratings For Websites
> Posted by timothy on Tuesday September 16, @09:38AM
> from the that's-a-lie dept.
> http://tech.slashdot.org/tech/08/09/16/1239213.shtml
>
> "While introducing the new World Wide Web Foundation{1} Tim Berners-Lee
made also asked for a system of ratings to help people distinguish truth and
untruth online.{2} 'On the web the thinking of cults can spread very
rapidly,' he said, saying that 'there needed to be new systems that would
give websites a label for trustworthiness once they had been proved reliable
sources.'"


Proved reliable?  Who is the authority that determines the proof? If
it's some web-based voting system, will it be any more reliable than
Wikipedia? What if someone who is "proved reliable" is actually
running a stealth campaign, and planning on using the "reliable"
reputation as a way to snooker people?


I respect Berners-Lee for his contributions to the Internet world, but
he sounds awfully naive in this case.

Calvin Dodge

_______________________________________________
Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
Subscription Options:
http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org