Aeolus451 said:
Teeqoz said:
Why would you trust the public any more than you trust the media? I mean, the idea sounds good in theory, but how on earth would you make it work?
Also, while the idea seems good, his (presumed from what he wrote) motivation for this rant is petty. Complaining about the media reporting accidents related to Teslas autopilot feature? Sure, maybe automotive accidents don't really belong on national news, but there has been a lot of public interest in autonomous vehicles lately, and Tesla isn't the only one under scrutiny...
I love the work Musk does with SpaceX, Tesla, OpenAI and more, but sometimes I wonder wether he's a huge jerk underneath, or at least rather immature. He threw a similar hissy fit at the last Tesla investor conference call when some of the analyst questions were becoming difficult (difficult as in trying to find out how Tesla plans to solve its cash situation). |
I think it's supposed to work like Wikipedia with sourcing or metacritic with reviews. If journalists or news organizations routinely report false or heavily biased information, they should be rated negatively for it.
|
So you'll need a team of a bunch of moderators, similar to wikipedia, to decide what is fair criticism and what's not. Seems like you'll just shift (some) of the potential abuse away from the media themselves, and over to this organisation deciding what is a reputabe outlet and what isn't. I hardly see how that's a positive - you'll centralize power over to one organization, and the more you centralize power, the easier it falls into the wrong hands.
