3 ms·
I'm about 50% through (the e-book; if someone presents interesting knowledge he should also get paid for it). So what you're saying is that I shouldn't have su
by erikb 9y ago
I'm about 50% through (the e-book; if someone presents interesting knowledge he should also get paid for it).
So what you're saying is that I shouldn't have such expectations towards the reporter. The reporter may or may not be smart enough to look behind the curtain, but his official job is not to look behind but to present the "objective" official grand narrative. Talking about the actual power struggle would expose him since it may be considered unprofessional and un-objective, as well as hurt his trust relations with people who give him inside info. So the most naive but objective report may actually be written by the smartest reporter. New point of view. Thanks!
- ryanx435 9y agoglad you enjoyed it. I first found this article series maybe a decade ago and it really changed the way I view the world. There are some flaws with it, but the overall thesis is pretty solid
- erikb 9y agoYeah, every good model can offer two things: Increasing the amounts of options in case there are two few (this model for instance enables god-seeking sociopaths to accept god's awayness and embrace it as a new freedom), or decreasing complexity and thereby also increasing your options (e.g. this model described to me the difference between the different talk modes and thereby enabled me to gather more information from such a news article like the Uber article). However no model is able to provide completedness. They either always lack some significant amount of reality, or create significant amount of fantasy on top. That was proven by different scientists in the 1930s and is explained quite well imo in Goedel Escher Bach. I don't remember the details but at least one of them was a Mathematician who basically delivered the proof that Math can't solve all the problems that Math tries to solve. It is impossible.