Comment

Comment on Why do people get mad at you for using Wikipedia, but treat Google and AI chatbots like they're gospel?

sbeak@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

liberal Wikipedia bias

Well of course, the wiki that supports free access to information is more often than not contributed by people who support that. But that is a very slight bias, and you’re pretty messed in the head if you believe that information should inherently be restricted to a certain group of people.

source

Sort:hotnew top

EggInDisguise@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
Reality has a left wing bias.

source
TheFogan@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
Unfortunately the biggest part is, there’s kind of 2 definitions of bias at this point.

There’s the older, what I’d consider should be the truer form where bias is about taking a side or leaning the interpretation of the established facts on things that don’t have a 100% perfect consistant answer. IE Sportsball team A is better than sportsball team B, when obviously every part of that equasion is a dynamic, every player has good and bad days. good and bad weather conditions etc… who they’ve played against and how good they are etc…

Same for political concepts where at the very least it’s worth noting there’s no agreed upon by all of political science good and bad with regards to ideas etc…

Then you’ve got the type B bias where… well one side is outright denying the objective facts. Going to the sportsball analogy, that’s like one side says “Team A won 900 to 0 against team B”, while fans of team B go “look the game’s score is right here… team b won 52-20”. and they call you bias for trusting the sportsball leagues official scores, and the game that aired on national television, over the word of team A’s number one fan.

source