←back to thread

270 points ilamont | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
wyldfire ◴[] No.21973326[source]
> Not all of these fake reviews are one stars – some give five star or other highly rated ratings. The catch with these highly rated reviews is many of them are created to give the false appearance that they were written by Tomlinson to raise his own Goodreads ratings, spoofing his name and photo and sometimes even using his own copyrighted writings.

Wow, that's devious. I wonder if any of the fake product reviews I've seen are obvious fake endorsements placed there by the competition.

replies(2): >>21973501 #>>21974868 #
degenerate ◴[] No.21973501[source]
This problem isn't one born with the internet. Think about all those "WE BUY HOUSES 4 CASH" signs you see at stop lights. Why can't the city simply look up the phone number on them and convict the business owner for breaking advertisement laws? Because there is no proof he put the sign there. It could be the competition trying to frame him! Thus, the signs are simply thrown out... and he can put new ones out tomorrow.
replies(5): >>21973565 #>>21974177 #>>21974243 #>>21975186 #>>21976871 #
munk-a ◴[] No.21973565[source]
At the same time, if that sign pops up four weeks in a row and is taken down four times - I should hope the city allocates a bit of labour to actually figure out who is doing it.

And that's the answer that GR doesn't want to hear - clear patterns of abuse are apparent and they need to allocate more manual labour into moderation - automatic moderation can get pretty decent accuracy, but there's always a grey zone where you need some manual review - as much as we shrink that zone I don't think we'll ever make it disappear.

replies(1): >>21977500 #
1. r_singh ◴[] No.21977500[source]
This is where phone verification comes to use, because a user can be tracked back to their phone number which can be tracked back to a real person.