Jay Baxter: commitment

Transcript context

…That makes sense. Okay. One other question is there's many people that are very polarized, like very disagreeable with a lot of things. How do they filter into this algorithm? How do you deal with people that are super anti-vax, super Jan 6, like all these very extreme potential views? If people really are so polarized that there isn't agreement among people that typically disagree, it's possible that this is one of those notes that might be correct, but it wouldn't be helpful to show as context. Maybe it's about a claim that people have really entrenched opinions about and they've read hundreds of things about it already. Probably this is just not going to improve people's understanding. It's just not going to be a helpful user experience. So it might not be the worst thing in those cases to not show the note. People, a few years ago, were pretty pessimistic that maybe fact-checking never changes people's understandings about what's true. Actually, there have been external studies run by people totally independent of us who have found that if you take a community note or posts with or without a community note... That actually, people's agreement with the core claims in the post does change if they see it with the note versus without. So we are having an impact on this thing that people previously thought was maybe not so easy to do. And so, it's nice to focus on the cases where there is the bridging agreement. I would also say there is this reputation component to the algorithm as well. So if you consistently rate notes in a way that is counter to the bridging-based consensus, then we will stop counting your ratings. So if you're the kind of person who constantly rates bad notes as helpful, we do filter you out. So there's a difference between those types of people versus the good but polarized ones. Yeah. I think one philosophical thing that's important is that we want all of humanity to participate. And sometimes, people are surprised by that. They'll be like, "Oh, aren't there people who shouldn't be doing this? ", or like, "Their thinking is so extreme or something, maybe they shouldn't participate." But our view is it's actually we want to have all of humanity here. Because if we have all of humanity, we then have the data to understand what notes will be helpful to actual humanity. We can better model that better or better understand and better show those notes. So it's advantageous to have people who have all sorts of points of views and we don't expect that every note will be loved by every single person. That's an impossible bar. But we do intend to show the notes that 80% of people are going to read and say, "Wow. I'm glad I knew that." And so, in that sense, it doesn't matter how maybe extreme someone views a person's views as. It's still great to have them in the program. So no matter what your views are, please sign up and participate. It helps identify what's really helpful.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.