jnotarstefano
Joined 16 years ago
Joined 16 years ago
(Another telltale sign is the fact that the link refers to Rolf Heuer as the Director General, but in fact he is the former Director General, while the current one is Fabiola Gianotti.)
But showing them the _reason_ why a certain website is blocked can become an opportunity to teach people critical thought, something that other comment threads point out.
Let me be more precise, and use tptacek's words in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12999887: "fake news = spam sites built from scripts consisting largely of a backcatalog nonsense stories [...] with a one or two carefully produced fake stories as a "payload".
I think this definition is as objective as it gets, and clearly excludes things I might disagree with politically, but are not the target of this extension.
I chose "safety" because I think I copied Chrome's message when visiting a website with an invalid certificate.
So, given some training data that produced two reasonable clusters with respect to the ground truth, I have a model that I can expect to generalize well on new data.
Now, this is not what that notebook shows, because it's missing the evaluating on testing data! The main point of the notebook is that the Jaccard Distance of the tokens of the HTML of the page, despite being very simple, appears to generate a reasonable model.
The main issue I wanted to address is the fact that such a blocker must be widely installed to be useful. Therefore, the Facebook message is intended to prod current users of the extensions to ask that their friends install it as well.
For example, I would never blacklist Breitbart, because I'm not interested in censoring political opinions I disagree with. I just want to free us from the burden of these websites that add nothing to the world and leech attention from everyone.