Wanted: Electronic Bilge Detector
In total, companies spend billions of dollars and individuals spend millions of hours improving Internet search engines, adding new features to Web browsers, enhancing the richness of the Web media delivery methods and creating or augmenting a whole host of other Web-related technologies.
I am grateful for all of the wonderful stuff that these companies and individuals throw at us. I’m particularly appreciative because many of them don’t charge us to use their stuff.
Nonetheless, one potential breakthrough technology that we desperately need but, as far as I can tell, don’t yet have, is a Web-based bullshit detector.
Here’s the problem that I see with the internet: Absolutely anybody can publish absolutely anything at almost no cost. In fact, if you don’t count the value of people’s time, the free blogging and wiki services let them do it for free. As a result, the BS flows freely and often overwhelms any wisdom that somehow manages to sneak onto the Net despite all of the obstacles in its way.
I’m not talking about fiction that is published as fiction. That’s put there for our enjoyment and I’m free to judge whether I do, indeed, enjoy it.
What I am talking about are the people who publish fiction, but label it as fact. Sometimes these people have convinced themselves, based on absolutely nothing, that what they are saying is reality. Fine, but if you’re going to spew your baseless mental maunderings, please warn me that, while you believe it to be true, you have absolutely no empirical basis for your beliefs.
This wouldn’t be a problem if there were a method to quickly drill through the bilge to get to the valuable stuff, but I haven’t found any way to do that.
You know what they say, “bullshit baffles brains.” Well, if BS baffles whole brains, what hope do us half-wits have to distinguish between sense and nonsense. If I knew enough to know whether authors of alleged nonfiction had done credible research and were telling me truths, then I wouldn’t need to read those authors’ words in the first place.
I don’t mean to come off as sanctimonious, but I clearly label my crap. I boldly include the word “Nonsense” in the title of this blog. And I doubt that many people put too much faith in the other noun in the title, “Stuff,” either.
If you’re too lazy to cast your eyes up to the title, or if you’re too stupid to realize that the word “Nonsense” is my way of telling you that I’m clueless about everything, then it’s not my fault if you ruin your life by basing your beliefs or actions on something I’ve said.
Unfortunately, not all Internet authors are as conscientious as I am. They crap their crap onto the Internet and pretend that they have a freaking clue when, in fact, they don’t.
I know what you’re going to say. The Internet didn’t invent the problem. That’s true. People have been intentionally or unintentionally publishing BS from the very first days that people published anything at all. I may be a cynic, but I suspect that the earliest cavepeople’s grunts were designed to pull the wool over their fellow cavepeople’s eyes.
(Yes, I do know that the term cavepeople, rather than cavemen, sounds awkward, but I recently spent a lot of time responding to religious devotees who objected to my previous post. I’m now too tired to have to deal with the excessively politically correct crowd too.)
You know how it probably went. Ogg, a caveman (note to politically correct crowd: because it’s a specific caveperson I had to pick a gender; I picked male; sue me), loudly gives the grunt that means, “There’s a weakened woolly mammoth loitering around the watering hole. It should be easy to hunt it.” The other cavemen (note to politically correct crowd: to hell with you; the ones I’m talking about all happen to be male) then rush out with their spears to search fruitlessly for the alleged animal. While they’re gone, Ogg goes in to their caves and screws their wives. No, the Internet didn’t invent deception.
Nonetheless, before the Internet came a long it usually cost a lot of money to spew garbage quickly out to the masses. True, demanding money is not a very democratic means of deciding who gets to disseminate disinformation to the great unwashed multitudes, but I’ve never claimed to be socialist.
The high cost meant that people generally had to have a very strong, self-serving reason for deluding everyone before they would do so. Not that that stopped them; there were just fewer of them.
And because there were fewer of them, people who made it their job to uncover the balderdash could address more of the nonsense than they possibly can today.
I’m not proposing doing away with the Internet. It’s provided some amazing benefits along with its incredible annoyances. What I’m looking for is a fully automated browser and email plug-in that will filter out and/or warn me about the BS.
Because of the dangers of false-positives, the technology should block bullshit sites and emails only very sparingly, but a warning system would be helpful in all cases.
The sort of thing I’m thinking of is a browser plug-in that will, as I surf the Web, pop-up warning messages such as the following:
- This site may contain a shred or two of truth, but you’ll have trouble finding those shreds among the copious crap. Use at your own risk.
 - This site is 100 percent pure hogwash. Then again, it’s such unadulterated nonsense that you may find it amusing, although the author likely thought he or she was being serious. Enjoy it, but don’t depend on in it for anything other than entertainment.
  - The authors of this site appear to honestly believe that they know what they are talking about, but they are thoroughly deluding themselves. If you are in a position to do so, you’d be well-advised to have them committed.
 - In the entire course of it’s existence, this site has never come within miles of anything that could possibly be described as wise or truthful. What’s more, there are no socially or culturally redeeming features. View it only if you are a complete idiot and you are eager to increase your idiocy.
That’s the sort of thing I’m looking for. Does anyone know if such a technology exists? If so, I’m hoping it doesn’t block my site, despite there being ample justification for doing so.
Categorised as: Internet
Aside from disagreeing that the internet has increased the level of misinformation (it’s always been prevalent, in my opinion, and the ability to compare stories has made sniffing the nonsense out easier).
But many of us already have a device to screen out the garbage. It’s called a brain. At least, that’s what I use. Of course, clearly many are bypassing the brain as one can readily see checking sites like snopes.com and the like.
I figure I’ll make an effort not to be part of the problem and try not to worry about the garbage unless it starts to affect the easily manipulated.
Stephanie Barr: Jeez, there you go again treating the stuff I say as if it’s supposed to be discussed in earnest. It’s not. Oh, well. Here’s my response anyway:
I didn’t say the Internet has increased the proportion of misinformation. I admitted that misinformation has always been there, although I have no empirical data on the ratio of information to misinformation today or in the past. But there is much more of everything — information and misinformation — out there, which makes it much more difficult to sift through it all.
And a brain? Obviously, you’re speaking for yourself. I’ve never claimed to have such a thing.
And “unless it starts to affect the easily manipulated?” Have you not looked around at the successful scams and propaganda out there? If you’re planning to start worrying about it only when it starts to affect the easily manipulated, then I suggest you start worrying.
The problem is not so much when I’m researching something I already know something about, but when I’m trying to learn something new. Joe’s Pizzeria and Quantum Mechanics Institute may have a very professional-looking Web site and Joe may be very proficient in using words in a way that make it sound, to the uninitiated in that topic, as if he knows what the hell he is talking about, when in fact he doesn’t.
Obviously, I’m joking about that fictitious site. I’m going to be suspicious of a Web site called “Joe’s Pizzeria and Quantum Mechanics Institute,” but if Joe called it the American Institute of Quantum Mechanics (I haven’t checked; my apologies if there really is such an institute), and included a official-looking emblem, as he could easily do, then I might trust the site. I don’t have time to research everything to find out if it’s truthful. And if I already know all of the information that the site has to offer (thus allowing me to verify its accuracy) then I have no use for the site.
Please don’t tell me that there is no reason for anyone to try to fool me about quantum mechanics. Yes I know that; it was a nonsensical hypothetical example. But, even in quantum mechanics, there are a lot of sick people out there who like to pretend they are geniuses when, in fact, they are idiots. And, apart from that, there a lot of topics out there where someone might be able to gain something by convincing someone of something that’s not true.
I’m a firm believer in the Better Business Bureau’s slogan, “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” My problem is not with the stuff that sounds too good to be true. I’m good at filtering that out. My problem is when I research a topic that I currently know nothing about and the information I find does not sound too good to be true, but it’s still not true.
But, in the end, what it all boils down to is, in this post I was simply going for the gags about the cavemen and the warnings. All of the rest was a lead-up to that. That and I was desperate to get a new post out there to get people away from the religion post that preceded this one. Some of the commenters to that one were starting to become extremely wearisome. I’m not making much money off this blog, not even meeting my server costs, so when it stops being fun, I’m out of here.
I’ve warned you in the past (and in this post) to never take anything I write here too seriously. You seem like a terrific person so no offense intended, but you take my site way too seriously. Your brain should have told you that’s ill-advised. Keep in mind, everything here falls under the title of “Stuff and Nonsense”. None of it is meant to be discussed academically. There is nothing wrong with academics — quite the contrary — but there is a time and place for that. This might be the time, but it’s certainly not the place.
Well, damn, I WAS taking it lightly. Must work on my serious tone and try to lighten it up.
I sift through OFFICIAL nonsense for a living to separate the dross from the useful stuff. Turns out to be an excellent job for me because I have an exceptional BS filter. Someone tosses out officious sounding garbage, chances are I’ll sniff it out.
So your doohickey isn’t of any use to me. And I just skimmed the caveman bit because it was all male (kidding!). Somehow, somewhere, I have to work on an electronic doohickey that will make sarcasm obvious so people don’t take my own nonsense seriously.
Hmm. I find it ironic that when I’m teasing people always take me seriously. When I’m serious, everyone thinks I’m joking. If you manage to find someone to build software tools, could you have them take care of that little problem for me?
Stephanie Barr: Here’s a hint for the future: If you find any deep insight or serious thought in this blog it’s appearance was purely accidental. At best, it was merely a weak, often failing stratagem designed to work my way toward what I hope will get me to the intended, but often not successfully executed frivolity.
Jan from BetterSpines: I wasn’t a huge fan of The DaVinci code. I didn’t hate it, but I didn’t love it either. That had nothing to do with the subject matter, just personal taste for writing styles. But I agree with you, I’ve never understood why so many people can’t figure out that a book that’s stocked on shelves that are clearly labelled “fiction” should not be treated as fact.
What about people who treat a work of fiction as fact?
The DaVinci Code being a prime example. almost the entire world acted as if it were biblical truth.
A novel is a novel is a novel.
Your logic isn’t quite complete. If you were truly honest– recognizing that your site is aptly qualified as “nonsense,” you wouldn’t be posting anything at all… Right?
Crabby Blogging Lady: Not true. Not at all true.
As I clearly stated in the post, I have nothing against fiction (in fact, I enjoy good fiction). What I object to is fiction that is passed off as fact. All I ask is, if people write crap, would they please clearly label it as such. As you mention, I clearly label my blog as nonsense. I expect people to treat it as such. If they don’t, that’s their problem. I warned them.
I’m pretty skeptical about everything I read on the ‘net, unless it’s a reasonably reputable site. It’s the “independent sites” (such as my very own) that should be scrutinized. Of course, if you’re coming to my blog to research your doctoral dissertation, well, that says more about you than it does about me, frankly.
Chris: I think your skepticism is wise, particularly when it comes to my site.
Funny you should mention (if only in jest) a doctoral dissertation. I know a few university professors, one of whom has told me on a number of occasions that her undergraduate students often quote from the Web in term papers, without citing proper references and without making much, if any, effort to verify the veracity of the site. Needless to say, that’s a pet peeve of hers and she admonishes her students for doing it.
I figured out two years ago that everything on the internet was a lie.Unclepedia is the most truthful resource out there.
C.B.Jones: I don’t know if everything on the internet is a lie. I can only speak for my blog and, like I’ve said, don’t trust it.
Did you mean uncyclopedia.org? (That’s what I found when I tried Googling Unclepedia.) I hadn’t heard of either. If you did mean uncyclopedia.org, thanks for that reference. I only read a couple of the articles, but based on what I saw, I plan to depend on it for all of my research going forward. It is a very useful resource. Thanks!
OMG I found a fact in your fiction piece. “People have been intentionally or unintentionally publishing BS from the very first days that people published anything at all.” I absolutely must have one of those plugins but not until I heal from the head injury because the opping up would be just too much to deal with in the sate I’m in. Why I can barely read my urban dicyionatu word of the day as it is. [flutters eyelashes]
timethief: Any facts that you found landed there purely by accident. And, OK, I’m a probably a complete idiot, but I can’t figure out what you’re referring to with your intentional typos. Did I misspell something in the sentence you quoted? If so, I’ve read it and reread it several times and I still can’t find it. I’m going to be exceptionally embarrassed if there is a typo there. Or did you need the urban dictionary to look up “BS”?
By the way, I should have warned you: I’m a lonely guy. I often take it the wrong way when women flutter their eyelashes at me.
Re txtspk: I’m not certain, but I think from my encounters with you elsewhere I figured out that I’m older than you are. (That’s not surprising as I’m considerably older than the average Web surfer.) The one comfort I take in my old age is that I’ll probably die before anyone forces me to learn txtspk.
Yes, I deliberately misspelled the word “dictionary”, just like person who commented on my blog to tell me that I had to “get real” and learn how to txtspk because it takes fewer letters.
I’m curious, did my last comment on this post get deleted or did it not get posted in the first place? Where one types in a comment is messed up. For I can’t see everything that I have typed until it gets posted, which is hard on me since I am very prone to typos–even after repeated proof reading. Anyway, I didn’t think the comment was that bad.
FishHawk: It got deleted. If all you are interested in doing is snarkily telling me that you didn’t think I was funny, then I have no use for your comment. This isn’t a democracy. It’s my blog. I don’t use a free blogging service. Instead, I pay for space on the server on which it runs. So, if you’re comment pisses me off, it’s gone.
I don’t delete comments from people who merely disagree with me, even if they disagree with me very strongly, as long as they aren’t belligerent in doing so. But if the only content in their comment is, essentially, “you were decidedly not funny,” then I don’t care to pay to be insulted on my own blog. I figure that’s why they give blog administrators a comment delete button in blogging software. And I’m not afraid to use it.
If you want to insult me, and goodness knows that there’s plenty about me that you can find to justifiably insult, then work hard at doing it in a humorous way. I leave those comments in.
Point well taken. It won’t happen again.
FishHawk: Thanks. I appreciate that.