>inb4 "it's a fact check"
They have receipts.
+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
@Hyolobrika it's essentially reuters fact checking themselves. that's the real problem.
@ArdainianRight @xianc78 @ryo
@Hyolobrika idk, probably all news outlets are owned by nestle or mars now. even different owners wouldn't fuck with each other, why should they.
@ArdainianRight @xianc78 @ryo
@bonifartius @Hyolobrika @ArdainianRight @ryo Well I tried looking for that article on every search engine and I couldn't find any results. I think the article is fake, but I have seen real articles talking about farmer's markets and how "extremist" they are.
@xianc78
of course one should double check stuff all the time. i believe fact checks were invented to have people unlearn this idea. i think i've seen the farmers markets are extremist article too.
the last years have proven to me that i fare much better with randoms from the internet and my own brain than with "news agencies" and other "official" sources :)
@Hyolobrika @ArdainianRight @ryo
@Hyolobrika
archives are neat and useful but no proof. kiwifarms was purged from archives. why shouldn't the archive links be fake? i don't know who pays the archives.
@ArdainianRight @xianc78 @ryo
I still think it would be great if all webpages were signed. Then the signed version could be hosted anywhere for proof and there would be no need to trust centralised archive websites and search engine caches.
@Hyolobrika yeah, signed copies would be something nice indeed.
@ArdainianRight @xianc78 @ryo
And also, how would you do so if articles get screenshotted instead of linked?
I was asking, how would that provide any guarantees of HTML pages to be real or not?
And what if these pages get screenshotted?
>what if these pages get screenshotted?
People shouldn't be so quick to believe screenshots.
Plus roughly 70% of the emails are HTML (thus unviewable in actually secure email clients like Mutt and ClawsMail), of which the vast majority include malware (tracking pixel, Javascripts, other types of telemetry etc) too, so very similar to most of the websoytes today.
Also, there's no reason HTML, JS, etc can't be signed.
>Though how are you supposed to sign an HTML webpage without being able to fabricate it?
I'd calculate the hash of HTML document and sign the hash.
Signing would solve the problem posed at the end.