[eeue56]

Interesting. In the Nordics, we have a couple of sites dedicated to fact checking news stories, done by real people. I think these kinds of automated tools can be helpful too, but needs to be tied to reliable sources. This became pretty apparent to me with the tech news coverage of xz, too. Lots of accidental (or sometimes intentional?) misinformation being spread in news articles. I wrote about it a bit[0], it was pretty sad to see big international publishers publishing an article based entirely on the journalist's misunderstandings of the situation. Facts and truth is important, especially as we see gen AI furthering the amount of legitimate looking content online that might not actually be true.

[0] - https://open.substack.com/pub/thetechenabler/p/trust-in-brea...

[pelasaco]

> In the Nordics, we have a couple of sites dedicated to fact checking news stories, done by real people.

We have it everywhere. The problem is however well-known: Human bias, political engagement from the fact checkers, etc.. AI (without any kind of lock, political bias built-in etc) could be the real deal, but because it may be not political correct, it will never happen.

[Xudong]

I wholeheartedly agree on the necessity of linking fact-checking tools to credible sources. Currently, our team's expertise lies primarily in AI, and we find ourselves at a disadvantage when it comes to pinpointing authoritative sources. Acknowledging the challenges posed by the rapid spread of misinformation, as highlighted by recent studies, we developed this prototype to assist in information verification. We recognize the value of collaboration in enhancing our tool's effectiveness and invite those experienced in evaluating sources to join our effort. If our project interests you and you're willing to contribute, please don't hesitate to reach out. We're eager to collaborate and make a positive impact together.