You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

seer comments on March 2015 Media Thread - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: ArisKatsaris 02 March 2015 06:51PM

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

Comments (70)

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

Comment author: seer 04 March 2015 03:49:56AM *  10 points [-]

I'm guessing that in practice means ranking websites by the popularity of their delusions. The problem is that you can't distinguish facts from fictions without reference to the external world. Furthermore, given how bad wikipedia is at getting its "facts" wright about any vaguely controversial topic, I don't have a lot of confidence in the ability of the internet to settle on the truth.

Edit: speaking of bad sources of "facts", why are you treating New Scientist as a reasonable source?