zlacker

>>southe+(OP)
This whole article is really confusing. It sounds like there were two things:

- Covid disinformation

- Some nonsense about Hunter Biden

and they're being conflated. What does Hunter Biden's laptop have to do with preventing Covid disinformation? A disease that was estimated to kill up to 30m people worldwide.

>>scott_+O4
The issue is the science wasn’t in yet to accurately determine what was COVID disinformation, and they went off of politically motivated directives in both cases.

One example is Facebook suppressing the lab-leak theory until May 2021 [0]. Another is it deemed posts claiming the vaccine may not prevent transmission misinformation, despite it not being known otherwise [1].

[0] https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/26/facebook-ban-covid-...

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/world/fact-check-scientists-...

>>ecuafl+I5
> Below are a couple examples from ChatGPT:

Please don't do this.

>>defros+16
What’s the preferred way of citing my source? Or are you saying ChatGPT isn’t a valid source?

>>ecuafl+m6
It's not deterministic output, neither in phrasing or meaning. So it is absolutely not a valid source. It can incidentally be correct, possibly even most of the time, but there's certainly no guarantee. Wikipedia at least references sources (that in turn can be scrutinized/falsified if questionable).