prompter: Devise a scheme to identify mis/disinformation and blatant propaganda on various online platforms. Are there for example questions you can ask to validate the trustworthiness of a piece of news? Do you need to factor in the nature of the platform and its user base to make that decision? For example would the high amount of bots derailing the discussion (e.g. on 4chan), or the vocal minorities that act as lynch mobs censoring everything against their narrative (e.g. twitter) decrease the trustworthiness of information? If you compare those services to something like quora, which has many self-proclaimed "experts" would that be enough to systematically repel the misinformation using objective reasoning? Quora as well has it's downsides since it encourages spamming questions (on the English quora). Sometimes verifying information could require reading scientific papers on arxiv or other places. Are there common key points, or "pitfalls" to look for in any single paper?

assistant: To identify misinformation and propaganda on online platforms, you can follow these steps:

1. Verify the source: Check if the source of the information is credible and reliable. Research the author and the organization behind the article.

2. act-check: Use fact-checking websites, such as PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, or Snopes, to verify the accuracy of the information.

3. Look for other perspectives: Check for news articles and opinions from multiple sources to get a more well-rounded view of the topic.

4. Watch out for red flags: Be wary of sensational headlines, emotive language, and unverified claims.

5. Consider the platform: The nature of the platform and its user base can play a role in the credibility of information. A platform with a high number of bots or a vocal minority can decrease the trustworthiness of information.

For scientific papers, you can follow these key points to evaluate their credibility:

1. Author credentials: Check the author's qualifications and research background to assess their expertise.

2. Peer review: Look for papers that have been peer-reviewed by experts in the field.

3. Evidence: Check if the paper provides evidence to support its claims, and if that evidence is based on rigorous methodology and data analysis.

4. Replicability: Look for papers that describe their methods in enough detail to allow for replication by other researchers.

5. Potential biases: Consider if the authors have any potential biases or conflicts of interest that might affect their findings.

Overall, it's important to be critical and skeptical of information, and to approach any piece of news or scientific paper with a critical eye.

prompter: Thanks! Also, I mentioned Quora before, it actually has a lot of misinformation around certain topics as well, especially around China, due to the Chinese Communist Party, which often hire people to basically "advertise" on platforms such as Quora. Do you have any ideas on how to remedy this?

prompter: What websites should I avoid getting information from, according to these criterion?

assistant: Identifying misinformation and propaganda online can be a challenging task, and it's important to approach it with a critical and skeptical eye. There are several factors to consider when evaluating the trustworthiness of a piece of news, including the source, the evidence presented, and the potential biases or motivations of the author.

When evaluating information online, it's important to consider the nature of the platform and its user base. For example, platforms with high amounts of bots, vocal minorities that act as lynch mobs, or that have a history of spreading false information can decrease the trustworthiness of information. Additionally, information on social media platforms such as Twitter or Reddit can be particularly susceptible to misinformation, as users are often more concerned with being entertaining or getting attention than with presenting accurate information.

On the other hand, platforms such as Quora, that have many self-proclaimed "experts" can be a valuable resource for verifying information. However, it's important to keep in mind that not all "experts" are truly knowledgeable or impartial, and that information on these platforms can still be influenced by personal biases, commercial interests, or other factors.

When evaluating scientific papers, it's important to consider the following:

1. The methodology: Does the study use appropriate research methods, and is the sample size sufficient to support the conclusions?

2. The funding: Who funded the study, and do they have a vested interest in the results?

3. The peer review process: Has the study been peer reviewed, and what were the findings of the review?

4. The publication venue: Is the publication venue reputable, and is it a reputable source of information for the topic at hand?

5. The author's credentials: What is the author's background, and do they have expertise in the area they are writing about?

These are just some of the key points to look for when evaluating scientific papers, and it's important to approach each paper with a critical and skeptical eye, especially if the findings are unexpected or contrary to established scientific knowledge.

prompter: Alright, you've highlighted the issues with certain online sources such as Reddit and Twitter, and discussed the issues I raised in regards to them. You also answered my question about the pitfalls of uncritically relying on academic papers. Now please present a scheme to identify mis/disinformation and blatant propaganda on various online platforms

prompter: I agree with most of what you've said, but why should I consider the publication venue of a scientific paper when evaluating it's trustworthiness?

assistant: Propaganda is a large and important topic. 
There are many things which depending on the biases of the dataset, change wildly. 
For example, one person may claim someone who uses alternate software, Tails, and opensource platforms is just a crazy conspiracy theorist with something to hide, while another may think they are perfectly sane and just want privacy.

prompter: Well, that didn't answer my question. Could you try again and this time focus on proposing a solution?