Emile comments on Med Patient Social Networks Are Better Scientific Institutions - Less Wrong

37 Post author: Liron 19 February 2010 08:11AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (49)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Emile 19 February 2010 05:23:40PM 8 points [-]

Google is still pretty reliable - as is Wikipedia, despite warnings that "anybody can edit" would lead to noise and inaccuracy.

Comment author: RobinZ 19 February 2010 06:33:30PM *  5 points [-]

The dedicated employees of Google and dedicated editors of Wikipedia do a lot of work to make sure that it is as little of a problem as it is - and there are still persistent issues. If it takes off, the dedicated employees of PatientsLikeMe will have to expect to do the same, and I will expect problems to fall through the cracks the same way they do on Wikipedia and Google.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 20 February 2010 01:44:17PM 2 points [-]

Strategies for gaming search engines are relatively easy to automatically detect and counteract, once you know what they are. On Wikipedia, a person who knows the subject in question will easily notice fradulent or incorrect information. But I'm not sure what criteria you could use to clearly detect cheaters on a site like this. You could ignore outliers, but that risks losing information from real people who actually have an unusual reaction to the medication. Even if you accepted that as necessary sacrifice, nothing's to prevent the cheaters from creating enough accounts to make them into non-outliers.