cite your sources

putting content in context

There are increasing efforts to deal with misinformation and disinformation on the internet but this is part of a larger issue with the hugely saturated sphere of internet content that often lacks context and deprioritises clarity and understanding. How do we properly balance safety and autonomy, (satire and truth, mystery and clarity) and most importantly who gets to determine this? More recently there have been some projects addressing provenance in the sort of ways I’ve been hoping for. Here are some more considerations on context.

notes pre- public release of chatgpt

“Educating people about how to assess risk is obviously a worthwhile exercise. However, lecturing them about what they should and should not fear does little to improve matters” - How Fear Works (Frank Furedi)(but i didn’t agree with enough of this book to bother finishing)
How to balance children’s rights, child safety, child autonomy
Demystify the internet without ‘shielding’ kids from stuff, limited/mediated access from a third-party
Maybe a sidebar of explanations, context, guidelines, and someone to talk to who is actually trained to chat with kids for education, triaging queries etc
‘informed consent’ model of content warnings rather than ‘safe search’ style or ‘trigger’-only warnings
Some AI models providing age-stratified provision for children - how up to date are ‘reading levels’? Is age still used for this — i looked this up where is it
Is there anything that actually ethically and accurately screens for ages? I doubt it. But also proven issues with self declared ages. But if no direct interaction between kids of those ages, maybe self declaration is fine?
Unknown/unofficial/anon/disconnected authors? ethics? right to be forgotten, right to be uncontactable, right to disown or defocus certain past works and frame your past in your own way. Link to the advice for citing trans academics
identifying and indicating intent, direct interest, personal opinion, third-party viewpoints, many are subjective links to expertise
Some intentions of content
- To entertain, perform
- To garner attention regardless of impact, to bait, to troll
- To educate, inform, share knowledge, organise
- To misinform, incite hatred
- To persuade, convert, sell, convince
- To sell based on false promises, unsourced claims
- To constructively criticise, discuss, clarify, correct, add on, boost others’ content
- To praise and congratulate
- To share, reflect, foster community, ask advice, be vulnerable
- To inflame, incense, criticise with call to action, boycott
- To support bigots and incite hatred, to target the vulnerable
Categorisation generation, content taxonomy, granularity, scope
fact checking AI is v questionable
Content provenance, authors, publishers, natural language descriptions of trust, trust mechanisms
Browser extensions or standalone browsers that value provenance more in visual hierarchy, ‘reader mode’. May have additional security features, translations, summaries?
Open hardware implementation (or linux browser for kindle-like devices) of content-viewing device- like an e-ink e-reader but also with readable internet content
Generating plenary questions from literature on e-readers
AI generated summaries/fact-checking/provenance on video content through transcripts, ethics
clearer forms of self-directed tone indication/intent declaration in micro-content to assist with social misunderstandings?

— TV tropes, know your meme, urban dictionary where it isn’t just hyperlocal, clickbait headline summarisers etc, combined and expanded to other public deceptions, jokes, common patterns, social phenomena etc for various cultures. General language AI can explain phrases or jokes I don’t have the context for but community-comment-twitter style is better. ethical considerations but maybe use to general demystifying of social patterns

notes post- public release of chatgpt

since then, many developments on individual platforms as well as large increase in uptake of AI models since ChatGPT came into public use, making this idea more mainstream, providing better examples
providing provenance to articles way easier than interactive sites and micro-content
on making sources very clear to allow informed consumption
time relevant comments - eg some stuff I comment about a game update is only relevant if you see it within eg first week of update being out
finally some projects are focusing on proper provenance!
but also many v questionable ai projects on this
which context is relevant when
many of my thoughts here have been altered by further understanding on trust in provenance - as trust is relational, context is required for recommendations etc
intersubjective methods are the best we can do. context-dependent context. views.

Resources

eg https://thetrustproject.org/

remix

on remixing sources and resources
citation, inspiration, reuse and composition
Resources
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1354856521994454

twitter thread -> AI text use into a song -> viral on tiktok (on reuse and creativity and ownership and IP)

peoples of any kind will always remix, image of any kind will remix, etc. idk. Just thinking of how much disinformation is by obscuring context, thinking also of clickbait vids with cutout style thumbnails very blatantly obscuring context. When is ‘fair use’ actually fair use outside of the concept of copyright. What is the goal and intent of using these images

notes pre- public release of chatgpt

notes post- public release of chatgpt

Resources

Resources

Resources

Resources

cite your sources

Mentions