4 ms·

-> Billboards are pretty helpful. They often tell me I can get food by taking the next exit. Usually I find the state-made info signs on the sides of freeways

-> Billboards are pretty helpful. They often tell me I can get food by taking the next exit. Usually I find the state-made info signs on the sides of freeways more informative than the advertisement billboards because it displays everything I need in one quick glance. The tiles of each "food" or gas or whatever option partitioned left or right, denoting which way I need to turn after the exit. That's just me, though. And I'm a weirdo who sometimes drives with his phone in airplane mode and chases NPR on the dial. -> If there weren't so much bullshit, you'd be less immune to it when it matters. I don't think this is necessarily true. It's not like it's 2 alternatives of content we're talking about, one legitimate and one not. I think it's more that there's legitimate content that's constantly getting interference from this extraneous and meaningless noise.

sillysaurus3 11y ago
It's not like it's 2 alternatives of content we're talking about, one legitimate and one not. I think it's more that there's legitimate content that's constantly getting interference from this extraneous and meaningless noise. It's important to remember that such abstractions enable you to reject the content you don't personally see as meritorious as unwholesome. And that's a sure way to fool oneself. Rewind the clock a hundred years and you might be arguing for prohibition. It's also classic no true Scottsman, for what it's worth. One's noise is another's music. Why is it there if no one finds it helpful? A better distinction is mistaken or not mistaken.
- nileshtrivedi 11y ago
  > Why is it there if no one finds it helpful? OP had a good answer: Negative externality.
- remarkEon 11y ago
  -> One's noise is another's music. Why is it there if no one finds it helpful? Sure, but I'm not talking about subjective opinions about content. I'm talking about the other things interfering with my ability to consume the content I'm trying to consume. And I don't think that this is a classic "no true Scottsman" in that sense. I'm not making any statement about what is or isn't true internet content (because obviously that would be silly). Perhaps my word choice of "legitimate" was unwise in that way.

sillysaurus3 11y ago

It's not like it's 2 alternatives of content we're talking about, one legitimate and one not. I think it's more that there's legitimate content that's constantly getting interference from this extraneous and meaningless noise. It's important to remember that such abstractions enable you to reject the content you don't personally see as meritorious as unwholesome. And that's a sure way to fool oneself. Rewind the clock a hundred years and you might be arguing for prohibition. It's also classic no true Scottsman, for what it's worth. One's noise is another's music. Why is it there if no one finds it helpful? A better distinction is mistaken or not mistaken.

nileshtrivedi 11y ago
> Why is it there if no one finds it helpful? OP had a good answer: Negative externality.
remarkEon 11y ago
-> One's noise is another's music. Why is it there if no one finds it helpful? Sure, but I'm not talking about subjective opinions about content. I'm talking about the other things interfering with my ability to consume the content I'm trying to consume. And I don't think that this is a classic "no true Scottsman" in that sense. I'm not making any statement about what is or isn't true internet content (because obviously that would be silly). Perhaps my word choice of "legitimate" was unwise in that way.