– Will your technology be able to replace a news reporter?

[sumaiyakhatun26]

- But how can an algorithm check facts? – Some – like “the sky is blue” – are easy to verify. Others are hard to verify, even for humans. Fake news is not just a reference to a fact, it is also a word used to describe someone associated with that fact. Who are they? “Rebels” or “terrorists”? Are they “conservatives” or “liberals”? Our algorithm creates a normalized story based on sources, cutting out extreme, extreme opinions on both sides – such assessments are rarer.


This does not promise the truth, but this is a philosophical question. For example, list of germany whatsapp phone numbers I have not yet had a single interview without the journalist’s factual errors remaining in the final article. People make mistakes, and so do machines. Read also Reputation and the Hype Pen: Why Cite Sources Even If You Write About Love – Is there a danger that in the future Google will learn to distinguish algorithmic news feeds from “natural” ones on websites and will start to penalize websites with algorithmic feeds in search results? – Professor Belts, whom I have already mentioned, told in her article about how our texts and texts written by people from Fox News were tested using a special algorithm GLTR-2.


Our texts showed the best result in terms of “humanity”. However, in the future, some competition between us and Google may arise. – A kind of “war of algorithms”… – In the end, it is the value of what you create that matters, not the method. I believe that machines will be as good as people. So the methodology (human vs. machine vs. another machine) will not matter.