I’m Search Engine Master Class. Trick is to word questions in a way “it likes” while retaining your goal.
I’m not saying “There are zero questions that Google hasn’t indexed”. There probably are.
But general education questions, property comparisons are quite likely already ‘out there’. Quora, Reddit, Yahoo Answers, etc probably contain the bulk of general knowledge Q and A, which Google has indexed quite nicely.
Also, where do you think Google GETS its answers?
Google had ME as “the answer” for:
“Who is President of Earth?”
In a fact box from Earth Day, 2015 to early 2016.
It would have stayed but I jiggled the underlying structure by popularizing another thing in the same realm that diluted “the fact” as a test, and it worked.
Ok. Eliminate credited sources.
Google does not give you facts.
TensorFlow doesn’t work that way. It consolidates all information from every source. This is why it’s so easy to trick Googlr.
Look up who created kirby? and you’ll USUALLY see the wrong picture with the right name. It’s a meme that is perpetuated by continual assertion by memers.
Facts are assertions. That is all.
Facts are assertions.
Anything more involved than that and you’re applying a system of winnowing.
But at its root, facts are assertions and that is all they are.
I’m not muddled. Facts are assertions. This forms the basis of identity. This is the root of “how computers use information”.
Did you know in the calculus that lies BEHIND _all_ computer programming languages, Boolean is nothing but a choice?
A = TRUE
B = FALSE
You can have C, D, E too if you like.
Good, quality, rich and acceptable (in polite society) facts are predicated on evidence.
Put enough together, expand a bit of doubt in the mind of the listener and before you know it, they change their mind.
There is probably no fact you can assert that CAN’T be undercut in some fashion.
It wasn’t much of a scour. Just two random finds from two quick searches.
Imagine if I had a point to try to prove. “scientific racialists” go to great lengths in similar fashion.
It’s not an oblate spheroid. Platonic forms aren’t real.
First, you need an ontology. Then, a theory to stick to the ontology.
Important point that Lucis sees:
Undercutting isn’t disproving.
Undercutting is “pulling the rug out” from under basic assumptions.‘
Interpretations undercut THEORY, which then may affect construction of facts.
Pain is traditionally measured subjectively.
This does not rule out objectively measurable pain that exists now and may in the future.